Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Alsacs, post: 1455604, member: 652"]
I'm sorry, I just can't let this Munson crap go. Another especially egregious misstatement:

"To make sure everyone understood its ruling, the Supreme Court went so far as to say in the Garvey decision that even when the arbitrator's "procedural aberrations rise to the level of affirmative misconduct," a federal judge may not "interfere with an arbitrator's decision that the parties [players and owners] bargained for.""

Yes, yes it did. Now let me show you the whole quote from the opinion.

---

Consistent with this limited role, we said in Misco that "[e]ven in the very rare instances when an arbitrator's procedural aberrations rise to the level of affirmative misconduct, as a rule the court must not foreclose further proceedings by settling the merits according to its own judgment of the appropriate result." 484 U. S., at 40-41, n. 10. That step, we explained, "would improperly substitute a judicial determination for the arbitrator's decision that the parties bargained for" in their agreement. Ibid. Instead, the court should "simply vacate the award, thus leaving open the possibility of further proceedings if they are permitted under the terms of the agreement." Ibid.

---

Here, let me repeat that sentence for you, Lester:

Instead, the court should "simply vacate the award, thus leaving open the possibility of further proceedings if they are permitted under the terms of the agreement."

One more time, with feeling?

Instead, THE COURT SHOULD "SIMPLY VACATE THE AWARD, thus leaving open the possibility of further proceedings if they are permitted under the terms of the agreement."

Some days I'm embarrassed by my chosen profession.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?