Trademark Remodeling, Inc. v. Rhines
United States District Court for the District of Maryland
2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109819 (2012)
- Written by David Bloom, JD
Facts
Trademark Remodeling, Inc. (Trademark) (plaintiff) entered into a construction contract with Greg and Sharon Rhines (defendants). The construction contract contained an arbitration clause that required any disputes to be resolved via binding arbitration. After a dispute arose, the matter went to arbitration. During the arbitration proceeding, counsel for the Rhines revealed confidential personal accounting information of Trademark’s principal owner, but that evidence was withdrawn, and the arbitrator did not consider the confidential information. A former Trademark employee testified in favor of the Rhines after the Rhines gave that witness a gift card. Trademark’s attorney cross-examined the witness about the gift card. At the conclusion of the arbitration hearing, the arbitrator awarded monetary damages to the Rhines. The Rhines commenced an action to enforce the arbitration award. Trademark motioned the court to vacate the arbitration award or, in the alternative, modify or correct the arbitration award on the grounds that the arbitration award was procured by undue means. Trademark argued that (1) the arbitration hearing was tainted due to the disclosure of Trademark’s principal owner’s confidential information, (2) the arbitrator improperly credited Trademark’s former employee’s explanation of the gift card, and (3) the arbitrator inappropriately conducted the arbitration hearing by permitting witnesses to testify by telephone and giving Trademark less time to present its case.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Grimm, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.