Court denies multiple challenges to NASD arbitration award
A District Court has denied a motion to vacate an arbitration award in a securities matter entered by an NASD panel, which sought vacation on the following grounds: (1) the award was irrational, in light of the evidence presented; (2) the Panel improperly refused to hear the rebuttal testimony of an expert; and (3) one of the arbitrators exhibited evident partiality. The Court concluded that the “irrationality” argument amounted to nothing more than a disagreement with the arbitrators' decision, that the evidence ruling was within the discretion of the Panel and that there was insufficient evidence of evident partiality. The court noted that “[a]s long as there is some basis for the arbitrators' decision, no matter how 'slender' that basis may be, the award must be confirmed.” Edward Mellon Trust v. UBS Painewebber, Inc., Case No. 06-0184 (USDC W.D. Pa. Nov. 6, 2006).
