Title: Merritt-Chapman & Scott Corp. v. State Road Dept.
Citation: 98 So. 2d 85
Docket Number: N/A
State: Florida
Issuer: Florida Supreme Court
Date: November 13, 1957

98 So. 2d 85 (1957)
Matter of the Arbitration Between MERRITT-CHAPMAN &amp; SCOTT CORP., and The STATE ROAD DEPARTMENT of the State of Florida.

Supreme Court of Florida.
November 13, 1957.
*86 Charles T. Boyd, Jr., Jacksonville, and Ross H. Stanton, Jr., Tallahassee, for appellant.
Glickstein, Crenshaw &amp; Glickstein, Jacksonville, and Raymond, Wilson &amp; Karl, Daytona Beach, for appellee.
HOBSON, Justice.
This is an appeal from an order of the circuit court denying a motion to set aside an award granted to appellee as the result of a statutory arbitration proceeding.
Appellant's principal charge is that there were acts of "misbehaviour or gross negligence" on the part of one or more of the arbitrators. Since the record is utterly barren of any evidence of such acts, and, indeed, of irregularities of any kind in the proceedings, we would be perplexed by appellant's choice of words were it not for Sec. 57.07, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., which provides that an award such as this "shall be set aside by the court only on the ground of fraud, corruption, gross negligence or misbehaviour of one or more of the arbitrators or umpire who may have signed the award, or of evident mistake acknowledged by the arbitrators or umpire." [Emphasis added.] The charges, then merely amount to a statement of two of the milder grounds which would have to be made out to authorize the court to set aside the award.
In a well-reasoned opinion, the circuit judge found and concluded in part as follows:
"Accordingly, the Court finds:
In holding that the award is supported by competent, substantial evidence, the circuit court went even beyond the necessities of the case, for we have held that in a statutory arbitration proceeding such as this "the courts will not review the finding of facts contained in an award, and will never undertake to substitute their judgment for that of the arbitrators." Ogden v. Baile, 73 Fla. 1103, 75 So. 794, 797. On broader principle, we stated in Cassara v. Wooford, Fla., 55 So. 2d 102, 105:
There is no error. The judgment appealed from is affirmed.
TERRELL, C.J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS and DREW, JJ., concur.