Document: 393 U.S. 145 89 S.Ct. 337 21 L.Ed.2d 301 COMMONWEALTH COATINGS CORP., Petitioner,v.CONTINENTAL CASUALTY CO. et al. No. 14. Argued Oct. 22, 1968. Decided Nov. 18, Rehearing Denied Feb. 24, 1969. See 1112, 848. Emanuel Harris, New York City, for petitioner. Overton A. Currie, Atlanta, Ga., respondents. Mr. Justice BLACK delivered the opinion of Court. 1 At issue in this case is question whether elementary requirements impartiality taken granted every judicial proceeding are suspended when parties agree to resolve a dispute through arbitration. 2 The petitioner, Commonwealth Coatings Corporation, subcontractor, sued sureties on prime contractor's bond recover money alleged be due painting job. contract contained an agreement arbitrate such controversies. Pursuant petitioner appointed one arbitrator, contractor second, and these two together selected third arbitrator. This supposedly neutral member panel, conducted large business Puerto Rico, which he served as engineering consultant various people connection with building construction projects. One his regular customers was that case. relationship sense sporadic arbitrator's services were used only from time at irregular intervals, there had been no dealings between them about year immediately preceding Nevertheless, patronage repeated significant, involving fees $12,000 over period four five years, even went so far include rendering very projects involved lawsuit. An arbitration held, but facts concerning close connections arbitrator unknown never revealed it by contractor, or anyone else until after award made. Petitioner challenged ground, among others, District Court refused set aside award. Appeals affirmed, 382 F.2d 1010 (C.A.1st Cir. 1967), we certiorari, 390 979, 88 1098, 19 1276 (1968). 3 In 1925 Congress enacted United States Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. §§ 1—14, sets out comprehensive plan controversies coming under its terms, both sides here assume Federal Act governs Section 10, quoted below, conditions upon awards can vacated.1 courts below however, § 10 could not construed way justify vacating We disagree reverse. does authorize vacation where 'procured corruption, fraud, undue means' '(w)here evident partiality * arbitrators.' These provisions show desire provide merely any impartial one. It true charge before us actually guilty fraud bias deciding case, have reason, apart undisclosed relationship, suspect him improper motives. But neither nor gave intimation financial relations existed years. doubt if litigant foreman jury judge court justice had, litigant, judgment would subject challenge. shown beyond Tumey v. State Ohio, 273 510, 47 437, 71 L.Ed. 749 (1927), held conviction stand because small part judge's income consisted collected convicted defendants. Although appeared amount compensation depended decided side other, too distinction allow manifest violation strict morality fairness expected other party Nor should all relevant, apparently thought here, '(t)he payments received (the arbitrator's) *.'2 For decision 'the slightest pecuniary interest' judge, specifically rejected State's contention 'so regarded likely influence improperly officer discharge duty *.'3 Since constitutional principle, see basis refusing find same concept broad statutory language proceedings provides 'evident partiality' use 'undue means.' also Rogers Schering Corp., 165 F.Supp. 295, (D.C.N.J.1958). arbitrators cannot sever their ties world, since they get work cases, should, anything, more scrupulous safeguard than judges, former completely free rein decide law well appellate review. perceive effectiveness process will hampered simple requirement disclose might create impression possible bias. 4 While controlling 18 Rules American Association, effect arbitration, highly significant. provided follows: 5 'Section 18. Disclosure Arbitrator Disqualification—At receiving notice appointment, prospective requested circumstances presumption believes disqualify Arbitrator. Upon receipt information, Tribunal Clerk shall parties, who willing proceed disclosed, shall, writing, advise Clerk. If either declines waive presumptive disqualification, vacancy thus created filled accordance applicable Rule.' 6 And based principle Association rule 33d Canon Judicial Ethics provides: 7 '33. Social Relations. 8 '* (A judge) pending litigation particularly careful avoid action may reasonably tend awaken suspicion social friendships, constitute element influencing conduct.' canon ethics rest premise tribunal permitted try cases must unbiased appearance believe purpose litigants submit boards biased against favorable another. Reversed. 11 WHITE, whom MARSHALL joins, concurring. 12 I am glad join my Brother BLACK'S make additional remarks. today standards decorum Article III indeed judges. often men affairs, marketplace, effective adjudicatory function. Cf. Steelworkers America Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co., 363 574, 80 1347, 1409 (1960). mean judiciary overlook outright chicanery giving awards; abdication our responsibility. automatically disqualified informed advance, unaware trivial. reason best most capable potential arbitrators. 13 functions amicable trusting atmosphere preserved voluntary compliance decree, without need enforcement. end establishing frankness outset, disclosure transactions has negotiating parties. many insubstantial point revealing suggest easily swayed, perhaps partisan party.* requires disclosure, imputation arise. better disclosed reject accept knowledge continuing faith objectivity, come light suspicious disgruntled seize pretext invalidating minimize role impartiality. That consigned architects own process, prevailing ethical reputations within business. 14 Of course, relationships diverse indeed, less remote commercial great numbers people. He complete unexpurgated biography. enough present purposes hold, does, substantial interest firm done trivial party, fact disclosed. err difficult identify those warrant 15 FORTAS, HARLAN STEWART join, dissenting. 16 dissent affirm judgment. 17 do lend themselves Court's ruling. despite unanimous claim made actual partiality, unfairness, bias, fraud. pursuant contracts rules Association. governed 1—14. Each chosen two. controversy relates 20 asked party. Petitioner's complaint failed volunteer information professional rendered contract, recent performed Both concedes, innocent motive. There suggestion concealment distinguished failure information. leading respected consulting engineer 'most contractors Rico.' known petitioner's counsel personal friends. candidly admitted told prior 'I don't think objected know Capacete arbitrator).' 22 Clearly, Judge's conclusion, affirmed First Circuit, correct, fair, hearings; reached proper determination issues them, plaintiff's objections represent 'situation losing now clutching straws attempt results became party." 23 nevertheless orders aside. uses singularly inappropriate announce per se statute jurisprudential principles: that, regardless fails inform however innocently, always being unanimous; nondisclosure indicates bias; conceded irregularity, partiality. Until today, compel setting circumstances.1 24 will, prima facie, support calculated, complaining disclaims misconduct, clearly overcome.2 25 necessary, appropriate, permissible rule, facts, constitutes necessary 10(b) 'Evident means what says: conduct—or least attitude disposition—by favoring rather other. demonstrates otherwise palpable injustice, anything approaching it. 26 essentially consensual practical. obviously designed protect integrity minimum insistence formulae rules.3 applies judges system characterized dealing reputation reliability. Such formalism contemplated warranted misconduct degree. 'In following district wherein order application arbitration— '(a) Where procured means. '(b) corruption arbitrators, them. '(c) postpone hearing, sufficient cause shown, hear evidence pertinent material controversy; misbehavior rights prejudiced. '(d) exceeded powers, imperfectly executed mutual, final, definite matter submitted '(e) vacated required expired may, discretion, direct rehearing F.2d, 1011. U.S., 524, S.Ct., 441. fact, found—on record admissions—that entirely fair impartial. read majority questioning finding way. Firemen's Fund Ins. Co. Flint Hosiery Mills, 74 533 (C.A.4th 1935); Texas Eastern Transmission Corp. Barnard, 177 123, 128—129 (D.C.E.D.Ky.1959), rev'd grounds, 285 536 (C.A.6th 1960); Ilios Shipping Trading Anthracite Bituminous Coal 148 698, 700 (D.C.S.D.N.Y.), aff'd, 245 873 (1957); Cross Properties, Inc. Gimbel Bros., A.D.2d 913, 225 N.Y.S.2d 1014, N.Y.2d 806, 236 61, 187 N.E.2d 129 (1962). Isbrandtsen Tankers, National Marine Engineers' Beneficial Assn., Sup., 808, 811 herein, quotes, phrased terms 'request' 'disclose Arbitrator.' 1964, changed (Emphasis supplied.) reports clear. H.R.Rep. 96, 68th Cong., 1st Sess., 1—2; S.Rep.No. 536, 3. Wilko Swan, 346 427, 431, 182, 184, 98 168 (1953).

Category: 7