FRAZIER v. CitiFINANCIAL CORPORATION, LLC Leagle.com
Because none of the statutory bases for vacatur or modification of arbitration awards set forth in the Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA"), 9 U.S.C. § 1, et seq. , applies in this case, and because the judicially-created grounds for vacatur we have recognized in our prior precedent are no longer valid after the Supreme Court's decision in Hall Street Assoc., L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc. , 552 U.S. 576, 128 S. Ct. 1396 (2008), we AFFIRM. I. BACKGROUNDIn April 2000, Frazier's husband, John Frazier, obtained a loan in the amount of $33,570 from HomeSense Financial Corporation of Alabama ("HomeSense"). Mr. Frazier signed a promissory note, a mortgage, and an arbitration agreement in connection with the loan transaction. Mrs. Frazier's signature also appears on the mortgage, although it was later determined by the arbitrator during the arbitration proceedings that her signature was forged by Mr. Frazier. The arbitration agreement provided, in pertinent part:
ARBITRATION AGREEMENT
![Lloyds Banking Group on a new course due to competition Telegraph.co.uk]("http://nt1.ggpht.com/news/tbn/0dHxV8r_kHF6iM/6.jpg")
Telegraph.co.ukLloyds Banking Group on a new course due to competitionTelegraph.co.ukLloyds has needed government support, first – in October – with a £17bn recapitalisation and then with the Asset Protection Scheme, taxpayer insurance for and more »