In re the Arbitration between Morris Rosen & Sons, Inc. & 800 Second Ave. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Arbitration between Morris Rosen & Sons, Inc. & 800 Second Ave. Co.

20 A.D.2d 883, 248 N.Y.S.2d 785, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3969

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

DecidedApril 23, 1964

StatusPublished

This text of 20 A.D.2d 883 (In re the Arbitration between Morris Rosen & Sons, Inc. & 800 Second Ave. 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 Morris Rosen & Sons, Inc. & 800 Second Ave. Co., 20 A.D.2d 883, 248 N.Y.S.2d 785, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3969 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment entered on March 28, 1963 on order denying petitioner’s motion to vacate the award in arbitration and to direct that the arbitration proceed de novo and granting respondents’ cross motion to confirm said award and direct entry of judgment is unanimously affirmed, with costs to respondents. It is clear that toward the close of this prolonged arbitration proceeding, after three separate meetings attended by the three arbitrators to discuss the evidence adduced upon the hearings, the determination of the other two arbitrators to allow substantial damages to respondents became evident; and the arbitrator designated by petitioner sought to delay and frustrate the conclusion of the proceeding. Concur — Botein, P. J., McNally, Stevens, Eager and Steuer, JJ.

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

Judgment entered on March 28, 1963 on order denying petitioner’s motion to vacate the award in arbitration and to direct that the arbitration proceed de novo and granting respondents’ cross motion to confirm said award and direct entry of judgment is unanimously affirmed, with costs to respondents. It is clear that toward the close of this prolonged arbitration proceeding, after three separate meetings attended by the three arbitrators to discuss the evidence adduced upon the hearings, the determination of the other two arbitrators to allow substantial damages to respondents became evident; and the arbitrator designated by petitioner sought to delay and frustrate the conclusion of the proceeding. Concur — Botein, P. J., McNally, Stevens, Eager and Steuer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 A.D.2d 883, 248 N.Y.S.2d 785, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3969, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-arbitration-between-morris-rosen-sons-inc-800-second-ave-nyappdiv-1964.