Porpora v. Wescon Transportation Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Porpora v. Wescon Transportation Co.

29 A.D.2d 958, 290 N.Y.S.2d 711, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4280

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

DecidedApril 8, 1968

StatusPublished

This text of 29 A.D.2d 958 (Porpora v. Wescon Transportation Co.) 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

Porpora v. Wescon Transportation Co., 29 A.D.2d 958, 290 N.Y.S.2d 711, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4280 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Two orders of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered on July 20, 1967 and December 1, 1967, respectively, reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs; plaintiff’s motions denied; and defendants’ motion to stay the action and to compel arbitration granted. In our opinion, [959]*959plaintiff’s dismissal from the defendant corporation was a proper matter for arbitration. It follows that the injunction pendente lite should not have been granted (CPLR 7503, subd. [a]) and the order of contempt should, likewise, not have been issued (Bachman V. Harrington, 184 N. Y. 458). Beldock, P. J., Christ, Brennan, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

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

Two orders of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered on July 20, 1967 and December 1, 1967, respectively, reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs; plaintiff’s motions denied; and defendants’ motion to stay the action and to compel arbitration granted. In our opinion, [959]*959plaintiff’s dismissal from the defendant corporation was a proper matter for arbitration. It follows that the injunction pendente lite should not have been granted (CPLR 7503, subd. [a]) and the order of contempt should, likewise, not have been issued (Bachman V. Harrington, 184 N. Y. 458). Beldock, P. J., Christ, Brennan, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 A.D.2d 958, 290 N.Y.S.2d 711, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4280, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/porpora-v-wescon-transportation-co-nyappdiv-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack