See also Hayes v. Ennis, 662 N.E.2d 910, 913 (Ill.App.Ct. 1996) (“An award will not be set aside due to gross errors in judgment in law or gross mistakes of fact by the arbitrator unless the errors or mistakes are apparent on the face of the award.”).

* * * The general view is that judicial review of an arbitrator's award is more limited than appellate review of a trial court's decision. [Citation.] An award will not be set aside due to gross errors in judgment in law or gross mistakes of fact by the arbitrator unless the errors or mistakes are apparent on the face of the award." Hayes v. Ennis, 278 Ill. App.3d 121, 127, 662 N.E.2d 910, 913 (1996). In Tim Huey Corp. v. Global Boiler Mechanical, Inc., 272 Ill. App.3d 100, 649 N.E.2d 1358 (1995), this court held that "[i]f the arbitrators have acted in good faith, however, the award is conclusive upon the parties.

For example, a court declined to set aside an appraisal award even though the court acknowledged that it was calculated without using a deduction that is an element of the relevant procedure, because the court reasoned that the theory behind not using the deduction "had logic," thus it was not "a gross mistake of law or fact" to omit it from the calculation. Gen. Cas. Co. v. Tracer Indus., Inc., 285 Ill.App.3d 418, 424 (1996); see also Hayes v. Ennis, 278 Ill.App.3d 121, 127 (1996) ("Arbitration awards should be construed, wherever possible, to uphold their validity. [...] An award will not be set aside due to gross errors in judgment in law or gross mistakes of fact by the arbitrator unless the errors or mistakes are apparent on the face of the award").