 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1
.
ORDER
|
EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
AWARD COURT DEL PLAINTIFFS VACATE MODIFY EVIDENT REVIEW FINDINGS MERITS PARTIES STATUTE CHANCERY PRE-AWARD PRE-JUDGMENT COMPOUND AUTHORITY AGREEMENT EXISTENCE MISCALCULATION MISTAKE MATTER ALTER LAW RNATTER AFFECTING CONTROVERSY CORRECT MATHEMATICAL ERRORS CHANGED COUNSEL |
IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
JOHN KUHN and BARBARA >
KUHN, >
>
Plaintiffs, > i.
>
V. ) C.A. No. 17112
> i
RICH.ARD HESS and DAWN --.
> ~.
HESS, >>
Defendants. >
O R D E R
The following findings and conclusions constitute the Order of the
Court:
1. On September 17, 1998, an arbitrator awarded $104,000 to
plaintiffs. The amount awarded represented a base award of $80,000 on
which $24,000 in simple interest accrued over three years.
2. Plaintiffs ask this Court to add pre-award interest, post-award
interest, and pre-judgment interest to the amount awarded by the arbitrator.
They also seek to have the total interest compounded instead of computed as
simple interest.
3. Since plaintiffs wish to have the arbitrator's award changed,
pl,aintiffs presumably ask this Court to either vacate or modify the award.
4. "There are only five grounds for which a court may vacate an
arbitration award: (1) the award was procured by fraud or undue means; (2)
partiality or corruption on the part of the Arbitrator was evident; (3) the
Arbitrator exceeded his authority; (4) the Arbitrator refused to appropriately
SNIPPETS:
|
|
|
| | | |
|
|
