| | Hawaii Supreme Court Case No. 15658 (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-06) |
 | | Under Hawaii's Arbitration and Award statute, Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS), chapter 658, a party is not barred from asking for a clarification of an arbitrator's award at a 685-8 confirmation hearing, even though that party had failed to bring a timely motion under either HRS 658-9 or 658-10. |
 | | However, this court concluded that the parties were actually seeking a modification or correction of the award "in the guise of a clarification." Id. at 212-14, 830 P.2d at 510-11. |
 | | This court responded to Tropical's argument by summarizing in detail the policy underlying the Arbitration and Award Statute, HRS chapter 658, and the reasons for strictly constraining judicial review of arbitration awards: It is generally considered that parties resort to arbitration to settle disputes more expeditiously and inexpensively than by a court action. |
| www.hsba.org /HSBA/Legal_Research/Hawaii/sc/15658.cfm (4486 words) |