City of Omaha v. Professional Firefighters Assn.
309 Neb. 918
| Neb. | 2021Background
- Firefighter Steve LeClair was charged after an alleged November 9, 2018 bar incident (criminal plea of no contest to assault/battery; 6 months probation) and was discharged by the City of Omaha following an internal investigation.
- LeClair invoked the collective bargaining agreement’s arbitration provision; a three-day arbitration hearing with 20+ witnesses and ~100 exhibits was held.
- The arbitrator applied the seven-factor Enterprise Wire test and found defects in the City’s investigation and discipline practices (e.g., pressured complainant, withheld video, lack of impartial pretermination decisionmaker), concluding the City lacked just cause to discharge LeClair and ordering reinstatement with limited backpay.
- The City sought vacatur in district court, alleging evident partiality, prejudicial misconduct, excess of arbitrator power, manifest disregard of Nebraska law, and public-policy conflict; the union moved to confirm and sought attorney fees for a frivolous vacatur attempt.
- The district court confirmed the award and found the City’s vacatur motion frivolous, awarding the union $16,020 in fees and costs.
- The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed confirmation of the arbitration award, held vacatur was not warranted on the asserted statutory grounds, and reversed only the district court’s fee award (finding the City’s arguments nonfrivolous though unmeritorious).
Issues
| Issue | City (Plaintiff) Argument | Union (Defendant) Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Evident partiality / prejudicial misconduct by arbitrator | Arbitrator’s rulings and factual findings show bias favoring LeClair and against the City | Rulings reflect credibility/inference choices, not bias; no specific biased acts identified | No evident partiality: rulings alone rarely show bias; a reasonable person would not be forced to conclude partiality under §25-2613(a)(2) |
| Arbitrator exceeded powers (argued under §25-2613(a)(3)) | Arbitrator misread CBA, ignored contract text, used Enterprise Wire test improperly, decided extra issues, and fashioned discipline | Arbitrator arguably interpreted the CBA and applied a permissible just-cause framework; remedies fit within arbitration authority | No excess of power: under Oxford Health standard, arbitrator arguably interpreted the contract and did not merely impose personal notions of justice |
| Manifest disregard of Nebraska law as basis to vacate | Arbitrator failed to apply Nebraska definition of good cause (Stejskal) — so manifestly disregarded law | NUAA does not provide for vacatur for manifest disregard; review is limited to statutory grounds | Courts lack authority under the NUAA to vacate awards for manifest disregard of law; district court correctly refused vacatur on that basis |
| Award violates public policy | Reinstating LeClair (given alleged racial/gender intimidation) undermines public policy against discrimination and public confidence in nondiscriminatory municipal services | Arbitrator did not expressly find race- or gender-based discrimination/intimidation; public-policy vacatur is narrow and requires explicit legal precedent | Public-policy vacatur denied: no arbitrator finding of discrimination and City failed to identify an explicit, well-defined, dominant legal policy that would bar reinstatement |
| Awarding attorney fees as sanction for frivolous vacatur motion | City’s vacatur motion lacked merit and was frivolous under Neb. Rev. Stat. §25-824(2) | City’s arguments, while unsuccessful, were not wholly without legal basis given unsettled questions about NUAA scope | Fee award reversed: City’s positions were nonfrivolous; any doubt resolved in favor of the party whose conduct is questioned |
Key Cases Cited
- Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter, 569 U.S. 564 (arbitrator exceeds authority only if award does not "draw its essence from the contract")
- Hall Street Associates v. Mattel, 552 U.S. 576 (limits on judicial review of arbitration awards; full-bore appeals inconsistent with arbitration)
- AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. 333 (review focuses on misconduct, not mere mistake)
- Dowd v. First Omaha Sec. Corp., 242 Neb. 347 ("evident partiality" standard: reasonable person would have to conclude arbitrator was partial)
- Seldin v. Estate of Silverman, 305 Neb. 185 (statutory FAA/NUAA grounds for vacatur are exclusive)
- State v. Henderson, 277 Neb. 240 (public-policy vacatur is narrow; court may refuse enforcement when award contravenes explicit, well-defined, dominant public policy)
- Hartman v. City of Grand Island, 265 Neb. 433 (NUAA limits courts to statutory grounds; rejects post-NUAA common-law vacatur grounds)
- Stejskal v. Dept. of Admin. Servs., 266 Neb. 346 (Nebraska discussion of "good cause"/"just cause" in employment termination review)
- Garlock v. 3DS Properties, 303 Neb. 521 (standard of appellate review for district court rulings on arbitration awards)