In re the Arbitration between Lorenz-Schneider Co. & International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 802

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Arbitration between Lorenz-Schneider Co. & International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 802

14 A.D.2d 923, 222 N.Y.S.2d 18, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7674

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

DecidedNovember 27, 1961

StatusPublished

This text of 14 A.D.2d 923 (In re the Arbitration between Lorenz-Schneider Co. & International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 802) 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 Lorenz-Schneider Co. & International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 802, 14 A.D.2d 923, 222 N.Y.S.2d 18, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7674 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

[924]*924The individual petitioners, former employees who purchased the routes were not parties to the collective bargaining agreement and had not participated in the proceedings before the arbitrator. Not being parties to the arbitration or to the agreement upon which it was held, such individual petitioners have no standing to move to vacate the award (Matter of Soto [Goldman], 7 N Y 2d 397; Matter of Romanoff [Nilow Realty Corp.], 273 App. Div. 788). Hence, we do not pass upon the questions urged solely in their behalf. Beldock, Acting P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.

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

[924]*924The individual petitioners, former employees who purchased the routes were not parties to the collective bargaining agreement and had not participated in the proceedings before the arbitrator. Not being parties to the arbitration or to the agreement upon which it was held, such individual petitioners have no standing to move to vacate the award (Matter of Soto [Goldman], 7 N Y 2d 397; Matter of Romanoff [Nilow Realty Corp.], 273 App. Div. 788). Hence, we do not pass upon the questions urged solely in their behalf. Beldock, Acting P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

14 A.D.2d 923, 222 N.Y.S.2d 18, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7674, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-arbitration-between-lorenz-schneider-co-international-nyappdiv-1961.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack