ARBITRATION

A.S.C.A. § 43.1011 does not provide a clear standard of review of arbitrated condemnation proceedings. A.S.G. v. .Annandale, 1 A.S.R.3d 19 (1997).

A.S.C.A. § 4.1044 provides for a remand where substantial rights of the petitioner have been prejudiced because the arbitrators’ decision violates of applicable constitutional or statutory provisions, or if it is made upon unlawful procedure. A.S.G. v. .Annandale, 1 A.S.R.3d 19 (1997).

In reviewing an arbitration award, the reviewing Court need not determine the applicable standard of review where it is apparent that the arbitrators failed to follow the specific statutory procedures. A.S.G. v. .Annandale, 1 A.S.R.3d 19 (1997).

A.S.C.A. § 43.1010 requires that the arbitration award contain findings or conclusions of the panel; reflecting how the award was determined. A.S.G. v. .Annandale, 1 A.S.R.3d 19 (1997).

Where an award does not contain specific, written findings or conclusions of the panel, but merely arrives at amount, the award should be remanded. A.S.G. v. .Annandale, 1 A.S.R.3d 19 (1997).