United States Tenth Circuit

In a dispute between minority and majority shareholders of a closely held corporation involving allegations that the majority usurped the company's corporate opportunities and transferred its assets to the detriment of the minority, orders confirming an arbitration award and awarding pre-judgment and post-judgment interest are affirmed where: 1) majority shareholders failed to show that the award should be vacated due to arbitrator's failure to resolve one particular controversy; 2) they failed to show an abuse of the extremely broad discretion granted to the arbitrator with regard to other disputed issues; 3) there was no error in refusing to consider certain evidence submitted with a motion to vacate the award; 4) there was no merit to a claim that appellants were denied an opportunity to present evidence or participate in the arbitration; and 5) there was no error in setting the date on which pre-judgment interest was to end and post-judgment interest was to begin.

Appellate Information

• Decided 08/07/2008
• Published 08/08/2008

Judges

• HOLLOWAY, Circuit Judge., Before LUCERO, HOLLOWAY and EBEL, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Tenth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Robert M. Anderson (Jennifer A. Whitlock with him on the brief), of Van Cott, Bagley, Cornwall & McCarthy, Salt Lake City, UT, for Plaintiffs-Appellees., Richard F. Ensor of Young, Hoffman, Strassberg & Ensor, LLP, Salt Lake City, UT, (Robert S. Clark and James Alhstrom of Parr Waddoups Brown Gee & Loveless, Salt Lake City UT and Brent O. Hatch and T. Parker Douglas of Hatch, James & Dodge, P.C., Salt Lake City, UT, with him on the brief), for Defendants-Appellants.