Martin v. NTT Data, Inc.
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
No. 2-CV-0686, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS (2020)
- Written by Samuel Omwenga, JD
Facts
In the context of a dispute in arbitration, Sarah Martin (plaintiff) waited two months after disclosure of the arbitrator’s interests and until after the arbitrator rendered an award in favor of the party on the other side of the dispute to file her challenge to the impartiality of the arbitrator. Although the disclosure of the arbitrator’s interests was required upon commencement of the arbitration, or upon routine due diligence, Martin was not able to discover the arbitrator’s interests before they were disclosed by mail on November 5, 2019. However, Martin did not challenge the arbitrator until after the arbitrator made the award on January 5, 2020. Martin did not mention the arbitrator’s nondisclosure and potential bias during the closing argument, which occurred after she received the disclosures. Nor did she provide any reason why she waited so long after the information about the arbitrator’s interests was disclosed and an award rendered to challenge the arbitrator.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Joyner, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.
