In re Cheney Bros.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Cheney Bros.

218 A.D. 652, 219 N.Y.S. 96, 1926 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5994

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 31, 1926·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The order should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion to compel arbitration [653] denied, with ten dollars costs, on the ground that the question as to whether or not the contract was fraudulently induced raises an issue of fact which must be tried before the right to arbitration under the contract may be enforced. If the contract was voided by fraud, the arbitration provision therein falls.

Present — Clarke, P. J., Dowling, Merrell, McAvoy and Martin, JJ.; Merrell and Martin, JJ., dissent.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

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

Per Curiam.

The order should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion to compel arbitration [653] denied, with ten dollars costs, on the ground that the question as to whether or not the contract was fraudulently induced raises an issue of fact which must be tried before the right to arbitration under the contract may be enforced. If the contract was voided by fraud, the arbitration provision therein falls.

Present — Clarke, P. J., Dowling, Merrell, McAvoy and Martin, JJ.; Merrell and Martin, JJ., dissent.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

In re Cheney Bros., 218 A.D. 652, 219 N.Y.S. 96, 1926 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5994 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1926).

Pincite

218 A.D. 652 (In re Cheney Bros.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related