Commonwealth Coatings Corp. v. Continental Casualty Co. involved the arbitration of a dispute between two contractors. The reasoning of the opinion of the court contains possible implications for the review of labor arbitration awards challenged on the ground of alleged partiality of the arbitrator. The federal district courts find jurisdiction to vacate labor arbitration awards under Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA), but nowhere in the LMRA is there an express test of partiality the courts can apply. Section 10 of the United States Arbitration Act provides a statutory test of "evident partiality,"'-but it has been held that the United States Arbitration Act does not apply to collective bargaining contracts in interstate commerce. A key issue, therefore, is whether the Section 10 test of "'evident partiality" developed in the opinion of Comnmionwealth Coatings Corp. v. Continental Casualty Co. should be applied to a question of partiality in a labor arbitration proceeding where there is no statutory test.
Roger C. Hartley, Note, Appearance of Bias as Grounds for Vacating an Arbitrator’s Award – Implications of Commonwealth Coatings Corp. v. Continental Casualty Co. for Labor Arbitration, 30 U. PITT. L. REV. 566 (1969).