In re the Arbitration between Blanco & Farr & Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Arbitration between Blanco & Farr & Co.

281 A.D. 1012, 121 N.Y.S.2d 265, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4100

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

DecidedMay 5, 1953

StatusPublished

This text of 281 A.D. 1012 (In re the Arbitration between Blanco & Farr & Co.) 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

In re the Arbitration between Blanco & Farr & Co., 281 A.D. 1012, 121 N.Y.S.2d 265, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4100 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

Regardless of whether applicable sections of the by-laws of the exchange be deemed to provide for statutory or common-law arbitration, there is an arbitrable dispute between appellant and respondent, who are both members of the New York Coffee and Sugar Exchange, Inc., and bound by its by-laws including section 45 thereof. As to the contract to arbitrate and the arbitrable dispute exist, all controversies are for the arbitrators including the timeliness oí the so-called adjudication proceeding. Order unanimously affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the respondent. Present — Dore, J. P., Cohn, Callahan, Van Voorhis and Breitel, JJ. [See post, p. 1013.]

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

Regardless of whether applicable sections of the by-laws of the exchange be deemed to provide for statutory or common-law arbitration, there is an arbitrable dispute between appellant and respondent, who are both members of the New York Coffee and Sugar Exchange, Inc., and bound by its by-laws including section 45 thereof. As to the contract to arbitrate and the arbitrable dispute exist, all controversies are for the arbitrators including the timeliness oí the so-called adjudication proceeding. Order unanimously affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the respondent. Present — Dore, J. P., Cohn, Callahan, Van Voorhis and Breitel, JJ. [See post, p. 1013.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

281 A.D. 1012, 121 N.Y.S.2d 265, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4100, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-arbitration-between-blanco-farr-co-nyappdiv-1953.