In re the Arbitration Concerning Certain Differences between St. John's Guild & Durkin & Laas

168 A.D. 889
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 15, 1915·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The objection that the arbitrators were not sworn is a fatal one, the oaths not having been waived in writing. (Code Civ. Proc: § 2369; Hinkle v. Zimmerman, 184 N. Y. 114.) The case appears to be a proper one, however, in which to direct a rehearing before the same arbitrators as authorized by section 2374 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Their failure to take the prescribed oaths did not, under the circumstances, indicate partiality or incompetence. The order appealed from will, therefore, be modified accordingly, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to the appellant. Present — Ingraham, P. J., Clarke, Scott, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ. Order modified as directed in opinion and as modified affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to appellant. Order to be settled on notice.

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

In re the Arbitration Concerning Certain Differences between St. John's Guild & Durkin & Laas, 168 A.D. 889 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1915).

168 A.D. 889 (In re the Arbitration Concerning Certain Differences between St. John's Guild & Durkin & Laas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Davis v. Rochester Can Co.
124 Misc. 123 (New York Supreme Court, 1924)
Krauter v. Pacific Trading Corp. of America, Inc.
194 A.D. 672 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1921)