In re the Arbitration between Fay & Signal-Stat Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Arbitration between Fay & Signal-Stat Corp.

281 A.D. 907, 120 N.Y.S.2d 130, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3742

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

DecidedMarch 30, 1953

StatusPublished

This text of 281 A.D. 907 (In re the Arbitration between Fay & Signal-Stat 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 Fay & Signal-Stat Corp., 281 A.D. 907, 120 N.Y.S.2d 130, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3742 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

On August 7, 1952, petitioner (union) and respondent (employer) stipulated, among other things, that one Pagan (an employee) be “reinstated” in respondent’s screw driver department “ on probation ” and that, if respondent claimed that Pagan’s production average in that department fell below a certain standard, the matter was to be submitted to arbitration, the named arbitrator being given authority to “determine how the dispute should be resolved”, and the award to be binding upon both parties. By notice dated December 18, 3952, respondent demanded arbitration of the issue: “ Shall the employer have the right to discharge “ * * Pagan for failure to comply with the provisions” of the stipulation [908]*908of August 7, 1952. Petitioner appeals from an order denying a motion to stay arbitration and directing that the dispute be submitted to arbitration in accordance with the stipulation of August 7, 1952. Order affirmed, without costs. The stipulation of August 7, 1952, does not show an intention to impose limitations upon the authority of the arbitrator. It is within the province of the arbitrator to determine how the dispute should be resolved if he finds that Pagan failed to comply with the standards required in the stipulation, whether by transfer of Pagan to another department, by discharge, or other disposition. Carswell, Acting P. J., Wenzel, MacCrate, Schmidt and Beldock, JJ., concur.

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

On August 7, 1952, petitioner (union) and respondent (employer) stipulated, among other things, that one Pagan (an employee) be “reinstated” in respondent’s screw driver department “ on probation ” and that, if respondent claimed that Pagan’s production average in that department fell below a certain standard, the matter was to be submitted to arbitration, the named arbitrator being given authority to “determine how the dispute should be resolved”, and the award to be binding upon both parties. By notice dated December 18, 3952, respondent demanded arbitration of the issue: “ Shall the employer have the right to discharge “ * * Pagan for failure to comply with the provisions” of the stipulation [908]*908of August 7, 1952. Petitioner appeals from an order denying a motion to stay arbitration and directing that the dispute be submitted to arbitration in accordance with the stipulation of August 7, 1952. Order affirmed, without costs. The stipulation of August 7, 1952, does not show an intention to impose limitations upon the authority of the arbitrator. It is within the province of the arbitrator to determine how the dispute should be resolved if he finds that Pagan failed to comply with the standards required in the stipulation, whether by transfer of Pagan to another department, by discharge, or other disposition. Carswell, Acting P. J., Wenzel, MacCrate, Schmidt and Beldock, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

281 A.D. 907, 120 N.Y.S.2d 130, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3742, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-arbitration-between-fay-signal-stat-corp-nyappdiv-1953.