Judicial review of arbitration awards in federal court is narrow and courts generally defer to arbitral tribunals. According to the U.S. Supreme Court in Hall St. Assocs., L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc., 552 U.S. 576 (2008; 1.usa.gov/1jyYiAK), the limited grounds for vacating awards enumerated in the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) are exclusive. Prior to Hall Street, most federal courts also recognized "manifest disregard of law" as a common law ground for vacatur, independent from the enumerated FAA grounds. The ruling in Hall Street cast doubt on the continued availability of the manifest disregard ground, without expressly eliminating it, and federal appellate courts remain divided in their application-and interpretation-of it.
展开▼
机译：联邦法院对仲裁裁决的司法审查范围很窄，法院通常服从仲裁庭。根据美国最高法院在L.L.C. Hall St. Assocs。 v。Mattel，Inc.，552 U.S. 576（2008; 1.usa.gov/1jyYiAK），撤回《联邦仲裁法》（FAA）中列举的裁决的有限理由是唯一的。在Hall Street之前，大多数联邦法院还承认“明显无视法律”是空缺的普通法依据，独立于列举的FAA理由。霍尔街（Hall Street）的裁决对明显无视理由的持续可用性表示怀疑，但并未明确消除它，而且联邦上诉法院在适用和解释方面仍然存在分歧。
展开▼
