Feinstein Iron Works, Inc. v. F.J. Sciame Construction Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Feinstein Iron Works, Inc. v. F.J. Sciame Construction Co.

7 A.D.3d 662, 776 N.Y.S.2d 841, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7050

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

DecidedMay 17, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 7 A.D.3d 662 (Feinstein Iron Works, Inc. v. F.J. Sciame Construction Co.) 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

Feinstein Iron Works, Inc. v. F.J. Sciame Construction Co., 7 A.D.3d 662, 776 N.Y.S.2d 841, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7050 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Thomas, J.), dated September 19, 2003, as granted that branch of the defendant’s motion which was to consolidate two pending arbitrations.

[663]*663Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The defendant established that the two pending arbitrations shared common issues of fact and law to warrant consolidation (see CPLR 602 [a]; County of Sullivan v Edward L. Nezelek, Inc., 42 NY2d 123 [1977]; Government Empls. Ins. Co. v Bailey, 251 AD2d 627 [1998]). Prudenti, P.J., Florio, H. Miller, Schmidt and Cozier, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Thomas, J.), dated September 19, 2003, as granted that branch of the defendant’s motion which was to consolidate two pending arbitrations.

[663]*663Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The defendant established that the two pending arbitrations shared common issues of fact and law to warrant consolidation (see CPLR 602 [a]; County of Sullivan v Edward L. Nezelek, Inc., 42 NY2d 123 [1977]; Government Empls. Ins. Co. v Bailey, 251 AD2d 627 [1998]). Prudenti, P.J., Florio, H. Miller, Schmidt and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 A.D.3d 662, 776 N.Y.S.2d 841, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7050, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/feinstein-iron-works-inc-v-fj-sciame-construction-co-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack