Ouimette v. Federman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ouimette v. Federman

51 A.D.2d 806, 380 N.Y.S.2d 626, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11388

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

DecidedFebruary 23, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 51 A.D.2d 806 (Ouimette v. Federman) 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

Ouimette v. Federman, 51 A.D.2d 806, 380 N.Y.S.2d 626, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11388 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding to stay arbitration, (1) appellants appeal, as limited by their brief, (a) from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered June 23, 1975, as (i) granted the application and (ii) denied those branches of their cross motion which sought to dismiss the petition as insufficient in point of law and to change venue and (b) from so much of a further order of the same court, dated September 4, 1975, as, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination, and (2) petitioners cross appeal from so much of the order dated September 4, 1975 as granted reargument. Appeal from the order entered June 23, 1975 dismissed as academic. That order was superseded by the order dated September 4, 1975. Order dated September 4, 1975 affirmed. Petitioners are awarded one bill of $50 costs and disbursements to cover both appeals. We agree with Special Term’s finding that petitioners are not subject to the arbitration agreement. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Hargett, Damiani, Christ and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding to stay arbitration, (1) appellants appeal, as limited by their brief, (a) from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered June 23, 1975, as (i) granted the application and (ii) denied those branches of their cross motion which sought to dismiss the petition as insufficient in point of law and to change venue and (b) from so much of a further order of the same court, dated September 4, 1975, as, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination, and (2) petitioners cross appeal from so much of the order dated September 4, 1975 as granted reargument. Appeal from the order entered June 23, 1975 dismissed as academic. That order was superseded by the order dated September 4, 1975. Order dated September 4, 1975 affirmed. Petitioners are awarded one bill of $50 costs and disbursements to cover both appeals. We agree with Special Term’s finding that petitioners are not subject to the arbitration agreement. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Hargett, Damiani, Christ and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 A.D.2d 806, 380 N.Y.S.2d 626, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11388, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ouimette-v-federman-nyappdiv-1976.