F.M. Ring Associates, Inc. v. Bevona

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

F.M. Ring Associates, Inc. v. Bevona

244 A.D.2d 160, 665 N.Y.S.2d 271, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11094

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

DecidedNovember 6, 1997

StatusPublished

This text of 244 A.D.2d 160 (F.M. Ring Associates, Inc. v. Bevona) 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

F.M. Ring Associates, Inc. v. Bevona, 244 A.D.2d 160, 665 N.Y.S.2d 271, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11094 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme [161]*161Court, New York County (Emily Goodman, J.), entered December 30, 1996, which denied petitioner’s application to permanently stay arbitration, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to petitioner’s appellate contention that it was not a signatory to the collective bargaining agreement that contains an arbitration provision, the record sufficiently demonstrates that petitioner was a member of the Realtor Advisory Board, and, as such, is bound to the terms of the collective bargaining agreement. Accordingly, petitioner’s application, brought beyond the 20-day period after service of the notice of intention to arbitrate, was untimely and properly denied (CPLR 7503 [c]; Matter of Aaacon Auto Transp. [State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.], 41 NY2d 951, cert denied 434 US 859). We have considered petitioner’s other contentions and find them to be without merit. Concur—Nardelli, J. P., Mazzarelli, Andrias and Colabella, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme [161]*161Court, New York County (Emily Goodman, J.), entered December 30, 1996, which denied petitioner’s application to permanently stay arbitration, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to petitioner’s appellate contention that it was not a signatory to the collective bargaining agreement that contains an arbitration provision, the record sufficiently demonstrates that petitioner was a member of the Realtor Advisory Board, and, as such, is bound to the terms of the collective bargaining agreement. Accordingly, petitioner’s application, brought beyond the 20-day period after service of the notice of intention to arbitrate, was untimely and properly denied (CPLR 7503 [c]; Matter of Aaacon Auto Transp. [State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.], 41 NY2d 951, cert denied 434 US 859). We have considered petitioner’s other contentions and find them to be without merit. Concur—Nardelli, J. P., Mazzarelli, Andrias and Colabella, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

244 A.D.2d 160, 665 N.Y.S.2d 271, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11094, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fm-ring-associates-inc-v-bevona-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack