v. Mattel, Inc., 552 U.S. 576 (2008), was a United States Supreme Court case that held that state and federal courts cannot, on a motion to vacate or to modify an arbitration award, expand the limited scope of judicial review specified in 9 U.S.C.

Hall sought review from the District Court, which found that the arbitrator's decision contained legally erroneous conclusions.

But §9 makes evident that expanding §10's and §11's detailed categories at all would rub too much against the grain.Because the Supreme Court rejected any expansion to the limited scope of judicial review stated in 9 U.S.C.

Previously, the Eighth Circuit had recognized "manifest disregard" as a grounds to vacate an arbitration award, defining manifest disregard as when "the arbitrators were fully aware of the existence of a clearly defined governing legal principle, but refused to apply it, in effect, ignoring it.

"[2] However, after the Supreme Court passed its ruling in Hall Street, the Eighth Circuit held that even manifest disregard is not a sufficient grounds to vacate an arbitration award.