B. L. Harbert International v. Hercules Steel Co.
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
441 F.3d 905 (2006)
- Written by Alexander Hager-DeMyer, JD
Facts
B. L. Harbert International, LLC (Harbert) (plaintiff) was a construction company contracted by the United States Army Corp of Engineers to build an office complex. Harbert subcontracted with Hercules Steel Company (Hercules) (defendant) for the project. The subcontract contained an arbitration provision for all disputes between the parties and provided that Harbert would create a schedule for the project and provide the schedule to Hercules. However, Harbert created two schedules, one with significantly earlier start and completion deadlines than the other. Hercules failed to meet the early deadlines but was well within the deadlines established by the second schedule. A dispute arose over the deadline discrepancies, and the parties arbitrated the matter. The arbitrator issued an award in favor of Hercules, ordering Harbert to pay the calculated balance due under the subcontract. Harbert petitioned a federal district court to vacate the award, arguing that the arbitrator’s award demonstrated a manifest disregard of the law. The district court dismissed Harbert’s motion to vacate and confirmed the award for Hercules. Harbert appealed to the Eleventh Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Carnes, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 824,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 989 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.