In re the Arbitration between C & Z Builders Corp. & Trieste Wrecking Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Arbitration between C & Z Builders Corp. & Trieste Wrecking Corp.

56 A.D.2d 767, 391 N.Y.S.2d 1013, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11031

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

DecidedMarch 10, 1977

StatusPublished

This text of 56 A.D.2d 767 (In re the Arbitration between C & Z Builders Corp. & Trieste Wrecking Corp.) 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 C & Z Builders Corp. & Trieste Wrecking Corp., 56 A.D.2d 767, 391 N.Y.S.2d 1013, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11031 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered October 18, 1976, which granted the application to permanently stay arbitration as against the petitioner-respondent Boomis, unanimously affirmed. Petitioners-respondents shall recover of respondent-appellant $40 costs and disbursements of this appeal. With the following additional comment, we affirm for the reasons stated at Special Term. The appellant cites Glasser v Price (35 AD2d 98) as authority for its contention that Special Term should have held a hearing to determine whether petitioner-respondent Boomis held such a dominant position over C & Z Builders Corporation that it was its alter ego, but, unlike Glasser, there is no question here of the identity of the party charged with the breach of the contract. It is the signatory to the contract, C & Z Builders Corporation, and hence no hearing was required. Concur—Murphy, J. P., Lupiano, Nunez, Markewich and Lynch, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered October 18, 1976, which granted the application to permanently stay arbitration as against the petitioner-respondent Boomis, unanimously affirmed. Petitioners-respondents shall recover of respondent-appellant $40 costs and disbursements of this appeal. With the following additional comment, we affirm for the reasons stated at Special Term. The appellant cites Glasser v Price (35 AD2d 98) as authority for its contention that Special Term should have held a hearing to determine whether petitioner-respondent Boomis held such a dominant position over C & Z Builders Corporation that it was its alter ego, but, unlike Glasser, there is no question here of the identity of the party charged with the breach of the contract. It is the signatory to the contract, C & Z Builders Corporation, and hence no hearing was required. Concur—Murphy, J. P., Lupiano, Nunez, Markewich and Lynch, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

56 A.D.2d 767, 391 N.Y.S.2d 1013, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11031, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-arbitration-between-c-z-builders-corp-trieste-wrecking-corp-nyappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack