Home/New York Court of Appeals/In Re the Arbitration Between Princeton Rayon Corp. & Gayley Mill Corp.

In Re the Arbitration Between Princeton Rayon Corp. & Gayley Mill Corp.

127 N.E.2d 729, 309 N.Y. 13, 1955 N.Y. LEXIS 957
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedJune 10, 1955
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 127 N.E.2d 729 (In Re the Arbitration Between Princeton Rayon Corp. & Gayley Mill Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals 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 Princeton Rayon Corp. & Gayley Mill Corp., 127 N.E.2d 729, 309 N.Y. 13, 1955 N.Y. LEXIS 957 (N.Y. 1955).

Opinion

Dye, J.

In this proceeding to stay arbitration, a substantial issue of fact is presented as to the making of an agreement to arbitrate, which should not be determined on affidavits but after a trial in the usual manner (Civ. Prac. Act, § 1450; Matter of Siracusa v. 421-425 W. 54th St. Corp., 237 N. Y. 572). The inten *15 tian to arbitrate must be clearly expressed (Matter of Riverdale Fabrics Corp. [Tillinghast-Stiles Co.], 306 N. Y. 288).

The order of the Appellate Division and that of Special Term should be reversed, with costs in this court and in the Appellate Division, and motion to stay arbitration granted, without prejudice to an appropriate trial of the issue of the making of an agreement to arbitrate pursuant to section 1450 of the Civil Practice Act.

The order of the Appellate Division and that of Special Term should be reversed, with costs in this court and in the Appellate Division, and the matter remitted to Special Term for further proceedings in accordance with the opinion herein.

Conway, Ch. J., Fuld, Froessel, Van Voorhis and Burke, JJ., concur with Dye, J.; Desmond, J., dissents and votes to affirm.

Orders reversed, etc.

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

Related

Colonial Penn Insurance v. Carter
157 A.D.2d 839 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
Task Associates, Inc. v. Delhi Steel Corp.
145 A.D.2d 927 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)
Burbank Broadcasting Co. v. Roslin Radio Sales, Inc.
99 A.D.2d 976 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)
Two Sisters, Inc. v. Gosch & Co.
370 A.2d 1020 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1976)
In re the Arbitration between C.M.I. Clothesmakers, Inc. & A.S.K. Knits, Inc.
85 Misc. 2d 462 (New York Supreme Court, 1975)
Housekeeper v. Lourie
39 A.D.2d 280 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1972)
Kolmer-Marcus, Inc. v. Winer
32 A.D.2d 763 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1969)
Sinva, Inc. v. Merrill, Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.
253 F. Supp. 359 (S.D. New York, 1966)
In re the Arbitration between Doughboy Industries Inc. & Pantasote Co.
17 A.D.2d 216 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1962)
Mike's Merry Go Round Rest, Inc. v. Lincoln Service, Inc.
29 Misc. 2d 176 (New York Supreme Court, 1961)
In re the Arbitration between Gayley Mill Corp. & Princenton Rayon Corp.
17 Misc. 2d 594 (New York Supreme Court, 1959)
In re the Arbitration between Writers Guild of America East, Inc. & Prockter Productions, Inc.
135 N.E.2d 204 (New York Court of Appeals, 1956)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
127 N.E.2d 729, 309 N.Y. 13, 1955 N.Y. LEXIS 957, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-arbitration-between-princeton-rayon-corp-gayley-mill-corp-ny-1955.