Sec. 5081. (1) If a party applies to the circuit court for vacation or modification of an arbitrator's award issued under this chapter, the court shall review the award as provided in this section or section 5080. (2) If a party applies under this section, the court shall vacate an award under any of the following circumstances: (a) The award was procured by corruption, fraud, or other undue means. (b) There was evident partiality by an arbitrator appointed as a neutral, corruption of an arbitrator, or misconduct prejudicing a party's rights. (c) The arbitrator exceeded his or her powers. (d) The arbitrator refused to postpone the hearing on a showing of sufficient cause, refused to hear evidence material to the controversy, or otherwise conducted the hearing to prejudice substantially a party's rights. (3) The fact that the relief granted in an arbitration award could not be granted by a court of law or equity is not grounds for vacating or refusing to confirm the award. (4) An application to vacate an award on grounds stated in subsection (2)(a) shall be made within 21 days after the grounds are known or should have been known. (5) If the court vacates an award, the court may order a rehearing before a new arbitrator chosen as provided in the agreement or, if there is no such provision, by the court. If the award is vacated on the grounds stated in subsection (2)(a) or (c), the court may order a rehearing before the arbitrator who made the award. (6) Other standards and procedures relating to review of arbitration awards described in subsection (1) are governed by court rule.
Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.5081
Vacation or modification of arbitration award; application; grounds; rehearing; other standards and procedures relating to review of arbitration awards
Applied in 12 court decisions — leading case Harvey v. Harvey (2004)
Most recently applied in 322 Mich. App. 562 - Janet Lashar Eppel v. Christopher James Eppel (January 2018)
Add. 2000, Act 420, Eff
How often courts cite this section
Court decisions citing this, by year. The dip in the last several years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so recent citations are undercounted.
Official source: Michigan Legislature. Reproduced from public-domain Michigan statutes; confirm against the official source for the current text. Not legal advice.