Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/Dwyer v. Biddle

Dwyer v. Biddle

274 A.D. 903, 83 N.Y.S.2d 138, 1948 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3980
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 25, 1948·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

In an "action to recover damages for malpractice, order denying motion of defendant for a stay of the action until arbitration be had between the parties, [904] affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. There is no satisfactory showing of the existence of a reciprocally enforeible written contract of the parties containing the claimed arbitration clause. (Civ. Prac. Act, §§ 1449,1451; Matter of Silvers, 14 N. Y. S. 2d 820, 822; Matter of Tanenbaum Textile Co. v. Schlanger, 287 N. Y. 400.) Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Sneed, JJ., concur.

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

Dwyer v. Biddle, 274 A.D. 903, 83 N.Y.S.2d 138, 1948 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3980 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1948).

274 A.D. 903 (Dwyer v. Biddle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sablosky v. Edward S. Gordon Co.
535 N.E.2d 643 (New York Court of Appeals, 1989)
Wolfman v. Herbstritt
114 A.D.2d 955 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1985)
Miner v. Walden
101 Misc. 2d 814 (New York Supreme Court, 1979)
Hull Dye & Print Works, Inc. v. Riegel Textile Corp.
37 A.D.2d 946 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1971)