In re the Arbitration of Dispute & Controversies Which Have Arisen between Braemoor, Corp. & Bryce

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Arbitration of Dispute & Controversies Which Have Arisen between Braemoor, Corp. & Bryce

244 A.D. 801

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

DecidedMay 15, 1935

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 244 A.D. 801 (In re the Arbitration of Dispute & Controversies Which Have Arisen between Braemoor, Corp. & Bryce) 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 of Dispute & Controversies Which Have Arisen between Braemoor, Corp. & Bryce, 244 A.D. 801 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from order denying appellant’s motion to confirm the award of arbitrators and for judgment on such award, and from order denying appellant’s motion for a reargument, dismissed, without costs, and without prejudice to a motion at Special Term to vacate the orders and to renew the motion, if appellant be so advised. An appeal does not lie from an order denying a motion to confirm an award of arbitrators. An award of arbitrators in an arbitration proceeding must, on application to the court, either be confirmed (Civ. Prac. Act, § 1456), vacated (§ 1457), or modified (§ 1458). Consistently with those provisions of the Civil Practice Act, an appeal may be taken only from an order vacating an award, or from a judgment entered upon an award, as from an order or judgment in an action. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 1464; Matter of Picker, 130 App. Div. 88; Matter of Gitt, 138 id. 147.) We are of opinion that on proper application the award should be confirmed. Assuming that the submission was pursuant only to the contract of February 16, 1934, that contract was acknowledged by both parties before the award was made. Such acknowledgment was sufficient compliance with the statute (Civ. Prac. Act, § 1449) for the purpose of the court’s jurisdiction to grant an order confirming the award. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Scudder, Tompkins and Davis, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal from order denying appellant’s motion to confirm the award of arbitrators and for judgment on such award, and from order denying appellant’s motion for a reargument, dismissed, without costs, and without prejudice to a motion at Special Term to vacate the orders and to renew the motion, if appellant be so advised. An appeal does not lie from an order denying a motion to confirm an award of arbitrators. An award of arbitrators in an arbitration proceeding must, on application to the court, either be confirmed (Civ. Prac. Act, § 1456), vacated (§ 1457), or modified (§ 1458). Consistently with those provisions of the Civil Practice Act, an appeal may be taken only from an order vacating an award, or from a judgment entered upon an award, as from an order or judgment in an action. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 1464; Matter of Picker, 130 App. Div. 88; Matter of Gitt, 138 id. 147.) We are of opinion that on proper application the award should be confirmed. Assuming that the submission was pursuant only to the contract of February 16, 1934, that contract was acknowledged by both parties before the award was made. Such acknowledgment was sufficient compliance with the statute (Civ. Prac. Act, § 1449) for the purpose of the court’s jurisdiction to grant an order confirming the award. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Scudder, Tompkins and Davis, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

244 A.D. 801, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-arbitration-of-dispute-controversies-which-have-arisen-between-nyappdiv-1935.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack