E. Arthur Tutein, Inc. v. Hudson Valley Coke & Products Corp.

New York Court of Appeals

E. Arthur Tutein, Inc. v. Hudson Valley Coke & Products Corp.

162 N.E. 592, 249 N.Y. 84, 1928 N.Y. LEXIS 764

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in E. Arthur Tutein, Inc. v. Hudson Valley Coke & Products Corp.. Read the opinion of the Court — 256 N.Y. 530 →

New York Court of Appeals·Decided July 19, 1928·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Under the contract between the parties, upon the refusal of Mr. Schulte to act as third arbitrator, before any evidence was produced, Mr. Schwab was empowered to name another to serve in his place. The orders should be reversed, with costs in all courts; the first question certified answered in the affirmative and the second and third questions in the negative.

■ Cardozo, Ch. J., Andrews, Lehman, Kellogg and O’Brien, JJ., concur; Pound, J., dissents; Crane, J., not sitting.

Ordered accordingly.

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

Per Curiam.

Under the contract between the parties, upon the refusal of Mr. Schulte to act as third arbitrator, before any evidence was produced, Mr. Schwab was empowered to name another to serve in his place. The orders should be reversed, with costs in all courts; the first question certified answered in the affirmative and the second and third questions in the negative.

■ Cardozo, Ch. J., Andrews, Lehman, Kellogg and O’Brien, JJ., concur; Pound, J., dissents; Crane, J., not sitting.

Ordered accordingly.

E. Arthur Tutein, Inc. v. Hudson Valley Coke & Products Corp., 162 N.E. 592, 249 N.Y. 84, 1928 N.Y. LEXIS 764 (N.Y. 1928).

Pincite

162 N.E. 592 (E. Arthur Tutein, Inc. v. Hudson Valley Coke & Products Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.