Ginsburg v. Carrin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ginsburg v. Carrin

146 A.D.2d 742, 538 N.Y.S.2d 469, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 896

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

DecidedJanuary 30, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 146 A.D.2d 742 (Ginsburg v. Carrin) 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

Ginsburg v. Carrin, 146 A.D.2d 742, 538 N.Y.S.2d 469, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 896 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

— In an action for a judgment declaring the rights of the parties under a written agreement, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Wood, J.), entered December 23, 1987, which, inter alia, directed the parties to resume and complete an arbitration proceeding and stayed the instant action pending the issuance of an arbitration award therein.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff’s contentions, we conclude that the defendant did not waive his right to arbitration by his actions during the arbitration proceeding. The defendant’s actions did not manifest a preference clearly inconsistent with his present claim that the parties were obligated to settle their differences by arbitration (cf., Sherrill v Grayco Bldrs., 64 NY2d 261, 272; Matter of Zimmerman [Cohen,] 236 NY 15, 19). Accordingly, the court was correct in directing the parties to resume and complete the prior arbitration proceeding, and in staying the instant action pending the outcome of that proceeding.

We have considered the plaintiff’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mangano, J. P., Brown, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.

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

— In an action for a judgment declaring the rights of the parties under a written agreement, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Wood, J.), entered December 23, 1987, which, inter alia, directed the parties to resume and complete an arbitration proceeding and stayed the instant action pending the issuance of an arbitration award therein.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff’s contentions, we conclude that the defendant did not waive his right to arbitration by his actions during the arbitration proceeding. The defendant’s actions did not manifest a preference clearly inconsistent with his present claim that the parties were obligated to settle their differences by arbitration (cf., Sherrill v Grayco Bldrs., 64 NY2d 261, 272; Matter of Zimmerman [Cohen,] 236 NY 15, 19). Accordingly, the court was correct in directing the parties to resume and complete the prior arbitration proceeding, and in staying the instant action pending the outcome of that proceeding.

We have considered the plaintiff’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mangano, J. P., Brown, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

146 A.D.2d 742, 538 N.Y.S.2d 469, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 896, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ginsburg-v-carrin-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack