In re Amsterdam Dispatch, Inc.

254 A.D. 233, 4 N.Y.S.2d 908, 2 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 807, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6386
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 27, 1938·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The contract provides that “ Should any difference arise between employer and employee, the same shall be submitted to arbitration by both parties; failing to agree they shall mutually appoint an umpire, whose decision shall be final.”

However desirable arbitration might be under these provisions to determine matters concerning which the parties have not agreed and thereby to create a contract which they have not made, it is not authorized by our statute. (Matter of Buffalo & Erie R. Co., 250 N. Y. 275; Matter of Fletcher, 237 id. 440.) Furthermore, these arbitration provisions when read with the provisions of paragraph 13 that during that time [the term of the contract] there shall be no revisions or modifications of this agreement ” must be held to be limited to “ any difference * * * between employer and employee ” concerning the construction, effect or performance of the contract. It should not be extended to allow either party to invoke arbitration to create a contract for them.

For these reasons and without consideration of the other questions urged on this appeal, the order should be reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion denied.

Present — Martin, P. J., O’Malley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.

Order unanimously reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied.

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

In re Amsterdam Dispatch, Inc., 254 A.D. 233, 4 N.Y.S.2d 908, 2 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 807, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6386 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1938).

254 A.D. 233 (In re Amsterdam Dispatch, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Universal American Corporation v. SS Hoegh Drake
264 F. Supp. 747 (S.D. New York, 1966)
Renis Fabrics Corp. v. Millworth Converting Corp.
25 Misc. 2d 280 (New York Supreme Court, 1960)
Pari-Mutuel Employees' Guild v. Los Angeles Turf Club, Inc.
337 P.2d 575 (California Court of Appeal, 1959)
In re the Arbitration between Brookside Mills, Inc. & Raybrook Textile Corp.
276 A.D.2d 357 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1950)
In re Arbitration between American Federation & Allied Mills, Inc.
196 Misc. 517 (New York Supreme Court, 1949)