A claimant whose lawyers years before gave more than $25,000 to the sole arbitrator’s judicial campaign failed to persuade the Third Circuit that the arbitrator harbored “evident partiality” against him.

The basis for his claim of bias? That the other side had contributed $4,500 to her campaign.

You got that right, people. The losing claimant accused the arbitrator of bias against him because his opponent lavished LESS THAN 20 PERCENT of his own lawyers’ campaign cash on her run for re-election to the Pennsylvania Superior Court. Freeman v. Pittsburgh Glass Works, LLC, No. 12-2026 (3d Cir. Mar. 6, 2013) (available at http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/122026p.pdf).