Shaffer v. PriorityOne Bank, No. 21-60802 (5th Cir. 2023)
Annotate this CaseThis opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on March 9, 2023.
Download PDF
Case: 21-60802 Document: 00516693195 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/29/2023 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED March 29, 2023 No. 21-60802 ____________ Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Eileen N. Shaffer, Chapter 7 Trustee for the Bankruptcy Estate of Debtors Danny & Judy Hall, Plaintiff—Appellee, versus PriorityOne Bank, Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi USDC No. 3:15-CV-304 ______________________________ Before Davis, Elrod, and Haynes, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* The opinion issued March 9, 2023, is withdrawn by the panel, and the following is issued in its place: Acting as trustee of a bankruptcy estate, Eileen Shaffer received a favorable arbitration award against PriorityOne Bank. The Bank sought to vacate that award in the district court, arguing that the arbitrator had a _____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 21-60802 Document: 00516693195 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/29/2023 No. 21-60802 conflict of interest. The district court held that even though the arbitrator did have a conflict, the Bank had constructive knowledge of that conflict and therefore had waived any ability to challenge the award on that ground. Having considered the briefing, oral argument, and relevant portions of the record, we conclude that the district court did not commit a reversible error in refusing to vacate the award on conflict-of-interest grounds. The district court also held that the Bank’s argument that the arbitrator manifestly disregarded Mississippi law cannot stand as a permissible statutory ground for vacatur under the Federal Arbitration Act. Even assuming without deciding that manifest disregard of the law can be a basis for challenging an award under the FAA as an argument that an arbitrator “exceeded his powers” under 9 U.S.C. § 10(a), the Bank fails to show that the arbitration award was in manifest disregard of Mississippi law. For the reasons stated above, we AFFIRM. PriorityOne Bank’s petition for panel rehearing is DENIED as moot. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
