Patrolmen's Benevolent Ass'n of the City of New York, Inc. v. District Council 37, AFSCME, AFL-CIO

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Patrolmen's Benevolent Ass'n of the City of New York, Inc. v. District Council 37, AFSCME, AFL-CIO

38 A.D.3d 449, 835 N.Y.S.2d 14

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

DecidedMarch 27, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 38 A.D.3d 449 (Patrolmen's Benevolent Ass'n of the City of New York, Inc. v. District Council 37, AFSCME, AFL-CIO) 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

Patrolmen's Benevolent Ass'n of the City of New York, Inc. v. District Council 37, AFSCME, AFL-CIO, 38 A.D.3d 449, 835 N.Y.S.2d 14 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael D. Stallman, J.), entered January 17, 2006, confirming the arbitrator’s award, dated September 2, 2004, and dismissing the petition seeking the award’s vacatur, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly found that petitioners, nonparties to the arbitration between District Council 37 and the City of New York, were without standing, either under statute or common law, to seek vacatur of the award rendered as a result of that arbitration (see CPLR 7511; Matter of Buffalo Bd. of Educ. [450]*450[AFSCME Local 264, Professional, Clerical & Tech. Empls. Assn.], 270 AD2d 814 [2000]; and see Matter of MFY Legal Servs. v Dudley, 67 NY2d 706, 708 [1986]). Petitioners’ claims of harm were too speculative to give rise to a cognizable interest, especially since there has been no suggestion that any of their members would be laid off or demoted as a result of the award (see Matter of International Assn, of Bridge, Structural & Ornamental Iron Workers, Local Union No. 6, AFL-CIO v State of New York, 280 AD2d 713 [2001]).

We have considered petitioners’ remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P, Saxe, Marlow, McGuire and Kavanagh, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael D. Stallman, J.), entered January 17, 2006, confirming the arbitrator’s award, dated September 2, 2004, and dismissing the petition seeking the award’s vacatur, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly found that petitioners, nonparties to the arbitration between District Council 37 and the City of New York, were without standing, either under statute or common law, to seek vacatur of the award rendered as a result of that arbitration (see CPLR 7511; Matter of Buffalo Bd. of Educ. [450]*450[AFSCME Local 264, Professional, Clerical & Tech. Empls. Assn.], 270 AD2d 814 [2000]; and see Matter of MFY Legal Servs. v Dudley, 67 NY2d 706, 708 [1986]). Petitioners’ claims of harm were too speculative to give rise to a cognizable interest, especially since there has been no suggestion that any of their members would be laid off or demoted as a result of the award (see Matter of International Assn, of Bridge, Structural & Ornamental Iron Workers, Local Union No. 6, AFL-CIO v State of New York, 280 AD2d 713 [2001]).

We have considered petitioners’ remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P, Saxe, Marlow, McGuire and Kavanagh, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 A.D.3d 449, 835 N.Y.S.2d 14, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/patrolmens-benevolent-assn-of-the-city-of-new-york-inc-v-district-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack