Matter of Pride Tech. of Ohio, LLC v. Philpott

2019 NY Slip Op 48
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 3, 2019
Docket8011 152363/17
StatusPublished

This text of 2019 NY Slip Op 48 (Matter of Pride Tech. of Ohio, LLC v. Philpott) 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
Matter of Pride Tech. of Ohio, LLC v. Philpott, 2019 NY Slip Op 48 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2019).

Opinion

Matter of Pride Tech. of Ohio, LLC v Philpott (2019 NY Slip Op 00048)
Matter of Pride Tech. of Ohio, LLC v Philpott
2019 NY Slip Op 00048
Decided on January 3, 2019
Appellate Division, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on January 3, 2019
Sweeny, J.P., Gische, Kahn, Oing, Singh, JJ.

8011 152363/17

[*1]In re Pride Technologies of Ohio, LLC, Petitioner-Appellant,

v

Chris Philpott, Respondent-Respondent.


Davis & Gilbert LLP, New York (Neal H. Klausner of counsel), for appellant.

Finney Law Firm, Cincinnati OH (Stephen E. Imm of the bar of the State of Ohio, admitted pro hac vice, of counsel), for respondent.



Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara Jaffe, J.), entered February 15, 2018, inter alia, denying the petition to vacate an arbitration award and confirming the award, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The arbitrator did not rewrite the parties' profit sharing agreement, nor was it irrational for her to determine that such agreement provides not only that its effective date is February 7, 2007, but also that respondent's profit interest will be credited or debited during "each full calendar year of employment," which, consistent with that provision, includes years preceding 2008 (see e.g. Azrielant v Azrielant , 301 AD2d 269, 275 [1st Dept 2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 509 [2003]; compare Matter of Riverbay Corp. [Local 32-E, S.E.I.V., AFL-CIO], 91 AD2d 509, 510 [1st Dept 1982]).

We have considered petitioner's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: JANUARY 3, 2019

CLERK



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

Related

In re the Arbitration between Riverbay Corp., Operating Co-op City & Local 32-E, S.E.I.V., AFL-CIO
91 A.D.2d 509 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)
Azrielant v. Azrielant
301 A.D.2d 269 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2019 NY Slip Op 48, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-pride-tech-of-ohio-llc-v-philpott-nyappdiv-2019.