In re the Arbitration of Certain Differences between Orange Pulp & Paper Mills, Inc.

261 A.D. 840, 24 N.Y.S.2d 961, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7715
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 27, 1941·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Order directing the parties to proceed to arbitration and designating an arbitrator reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, motion denied, with ten dollars costs, and proceeding dismissed. We construe paragraph “ 4 ” of the conditions attached to the contract as contemplating that the arbitrator or arbitrators should be selected in the manner provided by the Rules of the American Arbitration Association. (Matter of Oltarsh v. Classic Dresses, Inc., 255 App. Div. 532.) We dismiss the proceeding because the appellant had not failed, neglected or refused to arbitrate and, therefore, was not in default under section 1450 of the Civil Practice Act. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Adel, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur.

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

In re the Arbitration of Certain Differences between Orange Pulp & Paper Mills, Inc., 261 A.D. 840, 24 N.Y.S.2d 961, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7715 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1941).

261 A.D. 840 (In re the Arbitration of Certain Differences between Orange Pulp & Paper Mills, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gregg Kendall & Associates, Inc. v. Kauhi
488 P.2d 136 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1971)
Weatherford v. Allstate Insurance
26 Fla. Supp. 97 (Hillsborough County Circuit Court, 1965)
In re the Arbitration between Kesten & Cooper
25 Misc. 2d 760 (New York Supreme Court, 1960)
In re the Arbitration between Eimco Corp. & Deering, Milliken & Co.
6 Misc. 2d 422 (New York Supreme Court, 1957)