Goldberg v. Parker

221 A.D.2d 267, 634 N.Y.S.2d 81, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12163
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 28, 1995
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 221 A.D.2d 267 (Goldberg v. Parker) 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
Goldberg v. Parker, 221 A.D.2d 267, 634 N.Y.S.2d 81, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12163 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Opinion

—Order and judgment (one paper) Supreme Court, New York County (Paula Omansky, J.), [268]*268entered July 12, 1995 which, inter alia, denied the petition for a permanent stay of arbitration, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In the absence of an agreement between the broker and the customer wherein the parties designate New York law to govern the agreement and its enforcement, the matter of timeliness of claims under section 15 of the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) Code of Arbitration Procedure is for the arbitrator to determine, not the court (see, Matter of Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Co. v Luckie, 85 NY2d 193, 202). Here, there was no agreement between the parties; arbitration is sought solely because the broker/dealer is bound by the terms of the NASD Code of Arbitration Procedure as a registered broker/dealer. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Rubin, Kupferman, Asch and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Related

Kidder, Peabody & Co. v. Weiner
269 A.D.2d 119 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
Smith Barney, Inc. v. Vivian Hause
238 A.D.2d 104 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Smith Barney Inc. v. Heiman
235 A.D.2d 344 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Hamershlag, Kempner & Co. v. Oestrich
234 A.D.2d 172 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
In re the Arbitration between Mercurio & Lehman Brothers, Inc.
227 A.D.2d 207 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
Westmoreland Capital Corp. v. Findlay
916 F. Supp. 242 (W.D. New York, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
221 A.D.2d 267, 634 N.Y.S.2d 81, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12163, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goldberg-v-parker-nyappdiv-1995.