Breakstone v. Lehr

649 So. 2d 352, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 949, 1995 WL 46448
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 8, 1995·No. No. 94-1790·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendants appeal from an order denying their motion to vacate an arbitration award. We affirm.

The record demonstrates conclusively that none of the factors specified in section 682.13, Florida Statutes (1993), support vacating the arbitration award. The alleged acts and statements of one member of the panel of three arbitrators did not rise to the level of “evident partiality,” nor did defendants demonstrate that the allegations of bias, even if true, prejudiced the rights of any party as required by section 682.13. See also Schnurmacher Holding, Inc. v. Noriega, 542 So.2d 1327, 1329 (Fla.1989) (arbitration award may be set aside only upon grounds enumerated in section 682.13; principle of finality of arbitration awards must be adhered to “in order to preserve the integrity of the arbitration process as a means of alternative dispute resolution”).1

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Breakstone v. Lehr, 649 So. 2d 352, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 949, 1995 WL 46448 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

649 So. 2d 352 (Breakstone v. Lehr) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Schnurmacher Holding, Inc. v. Noriega
542 So. 2d 1327 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1989)
Donner v. Appalachian Ins. Co.
580 So. 2d 797 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)