Following Cable Connection, Inc. v. DirecTV, Inc. (2008) 44 Cal.4th 1334, this decision holds that an arbitrration clause which provided that “either party may file an application to correct or vacate the arbitration award or an application for de novo review on all questions of law based on the arbitrator’s finding[s] of fact” allowed the courts to review the arbitration award for errors of law.  However, it finds no error was made.  The Warriors’ contract with the Colieseum Authority provided for a 20-year initial term with two five-year options.  It also provided that if the Warriors “terminated” the lease, they would be liable for payments to the Authority through 2027.  Viewed in light of the extrinsic evidence, the word “terminated” was ambiguous and might include ending the contract by not exercising one of the options.  Once an ambiguity was found, the determination of what the contract meant in light of the extrinsic evidence was a question of fact which was not reviewable.  But in any case, the arbitrator correctly resolved that issue, too, as the extrinsic evidence showed that the contract was intended to guarantee the Authority a stream of income through 2027 so it could repay bonds which financed construction of the Colieseum.