The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed a $167.727 million arbitration award against Trevor Milton, the founder and former CEO of electric vehicle startup Nikola Corporation, rejecting his appeal to overturn the massive judgment.

In a memorandum opinion filed Feb. 5, 2026, a three-judge panel consisting of Circuit Judges Callahan, Owens, and Friedland unanimously upheld the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona's confirmation of the arbitration award. The case, *Nikola Corporation v. Milton* (No. 24-6210), represents a significant legal victory for the electric truck company against its controversial founder.

Milton had sought to vacate the award under sections 10(a)(3) and (4) of the Federal Arbitration Act, which allow courts to set aside arbitration decisions in limited circumstances involving arbitrator misconduct or exceeding authority. However, the appeals court found no grounds to disturb the lower court's ruling confirming the judgment.

The district court proceedings were overseen by Judge Diane J. Humetewa, who initially confirmed the arbitration award and entered judgment against Milton. The case originated from civil litigation filed in 2023, as indicated by the district court case number 2:23-cv-02635-DJH.

The Ninth Circuit applied a highly deferential standard of review when examining the district court's confirmation of the arbitration award. As the court noted, citing *Monster Energy Co. v. City Beverages, LLC*, review of arbitration awards is "both limited and highly deferential," and such awards "may be vacated only if it is completely irrational or constitutes manifest disregard of the law."

This stringent standard reflects federal courts' strong policy favoring arbitration as an alternative dispute resolution mechanism. Under the Federal Arbitration Act, courts have very limited authority to second-guess arbitrators' decisions, even when substantial money is at stake.

The appeals court determined that the case was suitable for decision without oral argument, indicating the panel found Milton's legal arguments insufficient to warrant further proceedings. The memorandum opinion format also suggests the court viewed the appeal as lacking sufficient complexity or precedential value to merit a published decision.

Milton, a Utah resident, founded Nikola Corporation as a Delaware corporation focused on developing electric and hydrogen-powered commercial vehicles. The company went public through a merger with a special purpose acquisition company in 2020, initially achieving a market valuation exceeding $30 billion.

However, Milton's tenure as CEO was marked by controversy and allegations of securities fraud. In September 2020, a short-seller report accused the company of making false claims about its technology capabilities. Milton resigned as executive chairman shortly after the report's publication amid mounting scrutiny from regulators and investors.

The substantial arbitration award against Milton likely stems from disputes related to his departure from the company and potential contractual obligations or indemnification issues. While the specific details of the underlying arbitration are not disclosed in the appeals court opinion, the $167.727 million figure represents one of the larger individual arbitration awards in recent corporate litigation.

Arbitration has become increasingly common in corporate disputes due to its perceived efficiency and confidentiality compared to traditional litigation. However, the substantial sum involved in this case highlights how arbitration can still result in significant financial consequences for corporate executives.

The Federal Arbitration Act's limited grounds for vacating arbitration awards include situations where the award was procured by corruption, fraud, or undue means; evident partiality or corruption by arbitrators; arbitrator misconduct; or instances where arbitrators exceeded their powers. Milton's appeal under sections 10(a)(3) and (4) specifically targeted arbitrator misconduct and exceeding authority, but the Ninth Circuit found these arguments unpersuasive.

The affirmance of this award demonstrates the difficulty parties face when challenging arbitration decisions in federal court. Courts consistently emphasize that arbitration's value depends on finality, and judicial intervention should occur only in exceptional circumstances involving fundamental procedural fairness or arbitrator authority.

For Nikola Corporation, the ruling represents closure in what has been a lengthy legal battle with its founder. The company has worked to rebuild its reputation and business operations following the controversies surrounding Milton's leadership and subsequent criminal charges in a separate federal prosecution.

The decision also reinforces the enforceability of large arbitration awards in corporate contexts, potentially influencing how companies structure executive agreements and dispute resolution clauses. As businesses increasingly rely on arbitration to resolve complex commercial disputes, the Ninth Circuit's decision provides additional precedent supporting the finality of arbitrator determinations.

With this appeal exhausted, Milton faces limited options for further challenging the award. The Supreme Court rarely grants certiorari in arbitration cases absent conflicts between circuit courts or issues of exceptional national importance, making additional appeals unlikely to succeed.