In re the Arbitration between Roosevelt Hospital

New York Court of Appeals

In re the Arbitration between Roosevelt Hospital

272 N.E.2d 491, 29 N.Y.2d 516, 323 N.Y.S.2d 983, 1971 N.Y. LEXIS 1191, 78 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2384

DecidedJune 10, 1971

StatusPublished

This text of 272 N.E.2d 491 (In re the Arbitration between Roosevelt Hospital) 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 Roosevelt Hospital, 272 N.E.2d 491, 29 N.Y.2d 516, 323 N.Y.S.2d 983, 1971 N.Y. LEXIS 1191, 78 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2384 (N.Y. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

[518]*518Order affirmed, with costs, in the following memorandum: Appellants’ contention that the modification by the Appellate Division improperly derogates powers within the exclusive province of the State Labor Relations Board is without merit. That order simply recognizes the employees ’ right under section 705 (subd. 3) of the Labor Law to question the union’s status upon the expiration of the certification period. At that time, the board may exercise its exclusive jurisdiction over representation questions (see Long Is. Coll. Hosp. v. Catherwood, 23 N Y 2d 20, 36) to determine whether or not the contract shall be deemed a bar to another election during the term of the contract.

Concur: Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Burke, Scileppi, Bergan, Breitel, Jasen and Gibson.

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

[518]*518Order affirmed, with costs, in the following memorandum: Appellants’ contention that the modification by the Appellate Division improperly derogates powers within the exclusive province of the State Labor Relations Board is without merit. That order simply recognizes the employees ’ right under section 705 (subd. 3) of the Labor Law to question the union’s status upon the expiration of the certification period. At that time, the board may exercise its exclusive jurisdiction over representation questions (see Long Is. Coll. Hosp. v. Catherwood, 23 N Y 2d 20, 36) to determine whether or not the contract shall be deemed a bar to another election during the term of the contract.

Concur: Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Burke, Scileppi, Bergan, Breitel, Jasen and Gibson.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

272 N.E.2d 491, 29 N.Y.2d 516, 323 N.Y.S.2d 983, 1971 N.Y. LEXIS 1191, 78 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2384, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-arbitration-between-roosevelt-hospital-ny-1971.