Bevis v. PaineWebber Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bevis v. PaineWebber Inc.

287 A.D.2d 364, 731 N.Y.S.2d 617, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9881

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 23, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 287 A.D.2d 364 (Bevis v. PaineWebber Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bevis v. PaineWebber Inc., 287 A.D.2d 364, 731 N.Y.S.2d 617, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9881 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jeffrey Atlas, J.), entered July 25, 2000, which denied the petition to vacate the NASD arbitration [365]*365award in respondent’s favor and granted respondent’s motion to confirm said award, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

As the motion court found, the arbitration hearing was fundamentally fair. Contrary to petitioner’s contentions, it was the proper prerogative of the arbitrators to bifurcate the proceedings and petitioner’s claims were properly dismissed after the liability phase of the proceedings (see generally, Matter of Bisnoff v King, 154 F Supp 2d 630), during which petitioner was afforded a full and fair opportunity to present evidence as to agreements governing his dismissal, severance pay, and entitlement to bonus compensation. Finally, that portion of the award assessing petitioner one half of the forum fees was not improper. Petitioner, having chosen to arbitrate his claims (see, e.g., Campbell v Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., 21 F Supp 2d 341, affd 205 F3d 1321), has waived any objection to payment of the fees entailed by that choice. We have considered petitioner’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Andrias, Wallach and Marlow, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jeffrey Atlas, J.), entered July 25, 2000, which denied the petition to vacate the NASD arbitration [365]*365award in respondent’s favor and granted respondent’s motion to confirm said award, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

As the motion court found, the arbitration hearing was fundamentally fair. Contrary to petitioner’s contentions, it was the proper prerogative of the arbitrators to bifurcate the proceedings and petitioner’s claims were properly dismissed after the liability phase of the proceedings (see generally, Matter of Bisnoff v King, 154 F Supp 2d 630), during which petitioner was afforded a full and fair opportunity to present evidence as to agreements governing his dismissal, severance pay, and entitlement to bonus compensation. Finally, that portion of the award assessing petitioner one half of the forum fees was not improper. Petitioner, having chosen to arbitrate his claims (see, e.g., Campbell v Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., 21 F Supp 2d 341, affd 205 F3d 1321), has waived any objection to payment of the fees entailed by that choice. We have considered petitioner’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Andrias, Wallach and Marlow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

287 A.D.2d 364, 731 N.Y.S.2d 617, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9881, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bevis-v-painewebber-inc-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack