Eleventh Circuit Confirms Arbitration Award: Interpretation, Not Modification, and the FAA Applies Unless the Contract Clearly Says Otherwise

Parties who lose in arbitration often try two familiar arguments on the way to federal court: that the arbitrator rewrote the contract instead of reading it, and that some body of law other than the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) should govern review. On September 10, 2026, the Eleventh Circuit rejected both in Univabs Solutions Private Limited v. The Radiology Group, LLC, an unpublished per curiam decision affirming confirmation of an award ¹. Law360 reported the award at $620,000 ². Although the opinion is not precedential, it is a clear restatement of how narrow award review is in the circuit that covers Florida, and it carries drafting lessons for anyone negotiating dispute resolution clauses.

The dispute

Univabs, an Indian company, provided radiology services to The Radiology Group (TRG) from 2012 to 2023 ¹. One of TRG’s managers, who handled finances and vendor payments, was also connected to Univabs ¹. When Univabs demanded arbitration for unpaid services, TRG counterclaimed that the manager had used inside knowledge to overcharge it ¹. The arbitrator read TRG’s operating agreement, which said certain managers could have other business interests and would incur no liability for them, as relieving the manager of fiduciary duties to TRG ¹. The arbitrator denied the counterclaims and ruled for Univabs ¹. The district court confirmed the award and denied TRG’s motion to vacate ¹.

The FAA applies unless the contract clearly says otherwise

TRG argued that the services agreement’s choice-of-law clause, which called for Georgia law, brought in the Georgia Arbitration Act ¹. The panel disagreed on two grounds. First, the arbitrator’s preliminary hearing order stated that the AAA rules and the FAA would apply, and nothing in the record showed TRG objected, so the argument was waived ¹. Second, under Gulfstream Aerospace v. Oceltip Aviation, a general choice of state law does not displace the FAA; the clause here specified the AAA Commercial Arbitration Rules and never mentioned the Georgia statute ¹. The court quoted Gulfstream’s summary: if parties want certain rules to apply to the handling of an arbitration, “the contract must say so clearly and unmistakably. Otherwise, the Federal Arbitration Act (‘FAA’) will apply” ¹.

Interpretation, not modification

On the merits, TRG argued the arbitrator exceeded his powers under 9 U.S.C. § 10(a)(4) by modifying the operating agreement ¹. The panel repeated that the courts’ power to second-guess an arbitrator is limited, describing that standard of review as “among the narrowest known to the law” and that arbitrators do not exceed their powers by making errors, even serious ones ¹. The only question is whether the arbitrator interpreted the agreement or abandoned it ¹.

Applying its Wiregrass framework, the court looked for the hallmarks of interpretation: textual analysis, use of evidence of the parties’ intent, and characterization of the task as interpretation ¹. The arbitrator had parsed the provision, contrasted the duties of named managers with those of the unnamed manager, and tied his reading to the parties’ intent ¹. That was interpretation, and the court emphasized in a footnote that its review does not extend to whether the interpretation was correct ¹. It also denied Univabs’s motion for sanctions ¹.

What it means for Florida practitioners

Several practical points follow for counsel in Florida, where the Eleventh Circuit hears federal appeals:

• Choice-of-law clauses do not choose arbitration law by default. A party that wants the Florida Arbitration Code, or another state statute, to govern review should name it expressly ¹.
• Objections belong in the arbitration. The waiver holding turned on silence when the arbitrator’s scheduling order announced the FAA and AAA rules ¹.
• Vacatur is not an appeal. A losing party that disagrees with the arbitrator’s reading of a contract has little room once the award shows real interpretive work ¹.

Those limits shape settlement value. When an award is this difficult to disturb, the most meaningful chance to influence the outcome comes before the hearing, through careful clause drafting and a realistic look at the merits. Mediation before or during arbitration gives parties a way to test their positions and keep control of the result, rather than relying on post-award motions that the courts review so narrowly.

Counsel looking for a Florida Supreme Court Certified Circuit Civil Mediator for a commercial or contract dispute can check Tony Roca’s live availability and book a mediation.