Hart Surgical, Inc. v. UltraCision, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
244 F.3d 231 (2001)
- Written by Whitney Waldenberg, JD
Facts
Hart Surgical, Inc. (plaintiff) and UltraCision, Inc. (defendant) entered into an agreement under which Hart became the exclusive Canadian distributor for UltraCision’s products. The agreement contained an arbitration clause. UltraCision terminated the agreement for nonperformance. Hart instituted arbitration proceedings against UltraCision. The parties agreed to bifurcate the arbitration into a liability phase and a damages phase. Following the presentation of evidence in the liability phase, the arbitrators found that UltraCision had wrongfully terminated Hart’s distribution agreement. Facing a one-year statute of limitations to seek vacatur of an arbitration award, UltraCision immediately filed an action in federal district court seeking review, even though the damages phase of the arbitration was still pending. The district court dismissed the action, concluding that under the Federal Arbitration Act, the award was not appealable because it was not a final award, given the fact that the damages phase of the arbitration was still pending. UltraCision appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Torruella J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 825,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 990 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.
