Frank Made Sportswear, Inc. v. Charles W. Carvin Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Frank Made Sportswear, Inc. v. Charles W. Carvin Co.

17 Misc. 2d 874, 186 N.Y.S.2d 921, 1959 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3658

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMay 21, 1959

StatusPublished

This text of 17 Misc. 2d 874 (Frank Made Sportswear, Inc. v. Charles W. Carvin Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Frank Made Sportswear, Inc. v. Charles W. Carvin Co., 17 Misc. 2d 874, 186 N.Y.S.2d 921, 1959 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3658 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

While the court below decided correctly that

there is an issue of fact with respect to the making of an agreement to arbitrate, it was error to postpone disposition of that issue until the trial of the main action. An agreement to arbitrate is not a defense to the action but only ground for staying it (American Reserve Ins. Co. v. China Ins. Co., 297 N. Y. 822). Since section 1450 of the Civil Practice Act specifically provides that when, as here, a substantial issue as to the making of a contract to arbitrate arises, the court or a judge “ shall proceed immediately to the trial thereof ’ ’, the court should have ordered the immediate trial of the issue.

The order should be modified to direct the immediate trial of the issue whether the parties entered into a contract to arbitrate, and as modified affirmed, without costs.

Concur — Hoestadter, J. P., Hecht and Aurelio, JJ.

Order modified, etc.

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

Per Curiam.

While the court below decided correctly that

there is an issue of fact with respect to the making of an agreement to arbitrate, it was error to postpone disposition of that issue until the trial of the main action. An agreement to arbitrate is not a defense to the action but only ground for staying it (American Reserve Ins. Co. v. China Ins. Co., 297 N. Y. 822). Since section 1450 of the Civil Practice Act specifically provides that when, as here, a substantial issue as to the making of a contract to arbitrate arises, the court or a judge “ shall proceed immediately to the trial thereof ’ ’, the court should have ordered the immediate trial of the issue.

The order should be modified to direct the immediate trial of the issue whether the parties entered into a contract to arbitrate, and as modified affirmed, without costs.

Concur — Hoestadter, J. P., Hecht and Aurelio, JJ.

Order modified, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 Misc. 2d 874, 186 N.Y.S.2d 921, 1959 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3658, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frank-made-sportswear-inc-v-charles-w-carvin-co-nyappterm-1959.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack