Crane v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Crane v. New York City Transit Authority

118 A.D.3d 561, 987 N.Y.S.2d 160

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

DecidedJune 17, 2014

StatusPublished

This text of 118 A.D.3d 561 (Crane v. New York City Transit Authority) 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

Crane v. New York City Transit Authority, 118 A.D.3d 561, 987 N.Y.S.2d 160 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Cynthia S. Kern, J.), entered June 10, 2013, which denied the petition seeking to vacate an arbitration award, dated February 12, 2012, imposing a 30-day suspension, and an arbitration award, dated May 23, 2013, terminating petitioner’s employment for misconduct, and for a rehearing of a grievance submitted by petitioner on June 7, 2006, and dismissed the proceeding brought pursuant to CFLR article 75, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Fetitioner has failed to argue, let alone set forth, any of the grounds for setting aside an arbitration award. He does not allege corruption, fraud or misconduct in procuring the award or partiality of the arbitrators. Nor does he allege that the arbitrators exceeded their power, failed to follow the procedure set forth in CFLR article 75, or that the award is irrational or violates public policy (see CFLR 7511 [b] [1]; Matter of Campbell v New York City Tr. Auth., 32 AD3d 350 [1st Dept 2006]). Petitioners’ allegations amount to nothing more than a claim that the arbitrators made errors of fact or law which, even if true, does not warrant vacatur of the awards (see Matter of New York City Tr. Auth. v Transport Workers’ Union of Am., Local 100, AFL-CIO, 6 NY3d 332, 336 [2005]).

Concur—Sweeny, J.E, Renwick, Andrias, Richter and Kapnick, JJ.

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

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Cynthia S. Kern, J.), entered June 10, 2013, which denied the petition seeking to vacate an arbitration award, dated February 12, 2012, imposing a 30-day suspension, and an arbitration award, dated May 23, 2013, terminating petitioner’s employment for misconduct, and for a rehearing of a grievance submitted by petitioner on June 7, 2006, and dismissed the proceeding brought pursuant to CFLR article 75, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Fetitioner has failed to argue, let alone set forth, any of the grounds for setting aside an arbitration award. He does not allege corruption, fraud or misconduct in procuring the award or partiality of the arbitrators. Nor does he allege that the arbitrators exceeded their power, failed to follow the procedure set forth in CFLR article 75, or that the award is irrational or violates public policy (see CFLR 7511 [b] [1]; Matter of Campbell v New York City Tr. Auth., 32 AD3d 350 [1st Dept 2006]). Petitioners’ allegations amount to nothing more than a claim that the arbitrators made errors of fact or law which, even if true, does not warrant vacatur of the awards (see Matter of New York City Tr. Auth. v Transport Workers’ Union of Am., Local 100, AFL-CIO, 6 NY3d 332, 336 [2005]).

Concur—Sweeny, J.E, Renwick, Andrias, Richter and Kapnick, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

118 A.D.3d 561, 987 N.Y.S.2d 160, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crane-v-new-york-city-transit-authority-nyappdiv-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack