Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-2612 — NE Code / Chapter 25 / Section 25-2612
View Statute 25-2612
Status: in_force

Within sixty days of the application of a party, the court shall confirm an award, unless within the time limits hereinafter imposed grounds are urged for vacating or modifying or correcting the award, in which case the court shall proceed as provided in sections 25-2613 and 25-2614 .

Laws 1987, LB 71, § 12.

Courts must give extreme deference to the arbitrator's conclusions; the standard of judicial review of arbitral awards is among the narrowest known to law. Signal 88 v. Lyconic, 310 Neb. 824, 969 N.W.2d 651 (2022).

Courts must give extreme deference to the arbitrator's conclusions; the standard of judicial review of arbitral awards is among the narrowest known to law. Signal 88 v. Lyconic, 310 Neb. 824, 969 N.W.2d 651 (2022).

Strong deference is due to an arbitrative tribunal, because when parties agree to arbitration, they agree to accept whatever reasonable uncertainties might arise from the process. Signal 88 v. Lyconic, 310 Neb. 824, 969 N.W.2d 651 (2022).

Strong deference is due to an arbitrative tribunal, because when parties agree to arbitration, they agree to accept whatever reasonable uncertainties might arise from the process. Signal 88 v. Lyconic, 310 Neb. 824, 969 N.W.2d 651 (2022).

Under Nebraska's Uniform Arbitration Act, a court may not overrule an arbitrator's decision simply because the court believes that its own interpretation of the contract, or the facts, would be the better one. Signal 88 v. Lyconic, 310 Neb. 824, 969 N.W.2d 651 (2022).

Under Nebraska's Uniform Arbitration Act, a court may not overrule an arbitrator's decision simply because the court believes that its own interpretation of the contract, or the facts, would be the better one. Signal 88 v. Lyconic, 310 Neb. 824, 969 N.W.2d 651 (2022).

Where arbitration is contemplated, the courts are not equipped to provide the same judicial review given to structured judgments defined by procedural rules and legal principles. Parties should be aware that they get what they bargain for and that arbitration is far different from adjudication. Signal 88 v. Lyconic, 310 Neb. 824, 969 N.W.2d 651 (2022).

Where arbitration is contemplated, the courts are not equipped to provide the same judicial review given to structured judgments defined by procedural rules and legal principles. Parties should be aware that they get what they bargain for and that arbitration is far different from adjudication. Signal 88 v. Lyconic, 310 Neb. 824, 969 N.W.2d 651 (2022).

Within sixty days of the application of a party, the court shall confirm an award, unless within the time limits hereinafter imposed grounds are urged for vacating or modifying or correcting the award. The court's obligation is mandatory rather than discretionary. Signal 88 v. Lyconic, 310 Neb. 824, 969 N.W.2d 651 (2022).

Within sixty days of the application of a party, the court shall confirm an award, unless within the time limits hereinafter imposed grounds are urged for vacating or modifying or correcting the award. The court's obligation is mandatory rather than discretionary. Signal 88 v. Lyconic, 310 Neb. 824, 969 N.W.2d 651 (2022).

When a party seeks to confirm an arbitration award pursuant to Nebraska's Uniform Arbitration Act, a court must confirm that award unless a party has sought to vacate, modify, or correct the award and grounds for such vacation, modification, or correction exist. Garlock v. 3DS Properties, 303 Neb. 521, 930 N.W.2d 503 (2019).

When a party seeks to confirm an arbitration award pursuant to Nebraska's Uniform Arbitration Act, a court must confirm that award unless a party has sought to vacate, modify, or correct the award and grounds for such vacation, modification, or correction exist. Garlock v. 3DS Properties, 303 Neb. 521, 930 N.W.2d 503 (2019).

This section does not allow for the exercise of discretion by the court when a request of confirmation is made where there has been no application for vacation or modification. Drummond v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 280 Neb. 258, 785 N.W.2d 829 (2010).

This section does not allow for the exercise of discretion by the court when a request of confirmation is made where there has been no application for vacation or modification. Drummond v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 280 Neb. 258, 785 N.W.2d 829 (2010).

The appellees filed a motion under this section seeking to confirm an arbitration award. Damrow v. Murdoch, 15 Neb. App. 920, 739 N.W.2d 229 (2007).

The appellees filed a motion under this section seeking to confirm an arbitration award. Damrow v. Murdoch, 15 Neb. App. 920, 739 N.W.2d 229 (2007).