Opinion ID: 167812
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Evidencing partiality

Text: 59 The parties discuss evident partiality as another ground for setting aside an appraisal, but Tribune Publishing has not alleged evident partiality, even when viewing its factual contentions in the most favorable light. On appeal, Tribune Publishing has not identified any paragraph in the amended complaint that alleges bias, the appearance of bias, or improper motive by MPI. In arguing that MPI displayed evident partiality in its briefs, Tribune Publishing merely restates its factual allegations that MPI applied the wrong definition of fair market value, violated professional appraisal standards, and failed to consider Tribune Publishing's evidence. Tribune Publishing acknowledges that the allegations in its amended complaint are insufficient by maintaining that its complaint alleges conduct by MPI that would lead a reasonable, well-informed observer to doubt substantially MPI's impartiality. Aplt. Br. at 45. Elsewhere, Tribune Publishing concludes that its allegations in the amended complaint would raise serious questions in a reasonable person's mind about MPI's impartiality. Aplt. Br. at 46. Because Tribune Publishing has failed to allege evident partiality in its first amended complaint, we have no basis for directing the district court to review MPI's appraisal on that ground. 60