Reason: Lack of Due Process!
Here is a wild one, but one that shows appellate (and trial) courts will not hesitate to reverse awards when unfairness and due process concerns are present.
In Wang v. Sun Led Sign Supply, Inc., Case No. B224195 (2d Dist., Div. 2 Aug. 17, 2011) (unpublished), an arbitrator entered a hefty $192,286 fees award to one party in an arbitration although he did not let the opposition look at any billing statements in support of the award (but nevertheless reviewed the billings in camera). This did not set well with the lower court, which vacated the award. The appellate court felt the same way.
“Nothing is more fundamental to our legal system than the idea that a legal proceeding is unfair if a party is denied the opportunity to know the evidence against him and respond to it. We easily conclude that the arbitrator’s in camera review of billing records was inimical to justice . . . . the trial court was required to vacate the arbitration award.” Even the deferential Moncharsh standard does not “negate the power of courts to review a fundamentally unfair procedure.” Because the opposition was denied an opportunity to respond to the in camera evidence submitted in support of the attorney’s fees motion, “it is safe to say that vacatur is mandatory. All other issues are moot.”
Inside the Star Chamber.