Schlaifer v. Kaiser

46 A.D.2d 850, 361 N.Y.S.2d 183, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3494
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 3, 1974
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 46 A.D.2d 850 (Schlaifer v. Kaiser) 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
Schlaifer v. Kaiser, 46 A.D.2d 850, 361 N.Y.S.2d 183, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3494 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1974).

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered July 16, 1974, dismissing the petition and denying a stay of arbitration, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs and without disbursements, and vacated, and the matter remanded for a preliminary hearing to determine if the proceeding is time-barred. The respondent, Samuel Kaiser (Kaiser), had entered into an employment contract with petitioner, Charles Sehlaifer & Co., Inc., (Sehlaifer), in 1964, which agreement was allegedly extended from time to time until respondent resigned in February, 1974. Kaiser also had entered into a stockholder’s agreement on March 31, 1964 which, by its terms, was to terminate two years thereafter. Disputes relating to the agreements were to be determined by arbitration. Sehlaifer’s claim is that since the cause of action of Kaiser accrued no later than April 1, 1966, it is now time-barred. Kaiser, however, takes the position that the stockholder’s agreement was repeatedly renewed until the time of his resignation and therefore the claim is still viable. CPLR 7503 (subd. [b]) and CPLR 7502 (subd. [b]) mandate that the initial determination as to whether a claim is time-barred is for the court (Matter of Andresen é Go. v. Shepard, 45 A D 2d 578), and we have accordingly directed that a hearing be conducted to determine that threshold question. Concur— Nunez, J. P., Murphy, Steuer, Tilzer and Lane, JJ.

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

Related

Steiner v. Wenning
53 A.D.2d 437 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1976)
In re the Arbitration between Schlaifer & Kaiser
84 Misc. 2d 817 (New York Supreme Court, 1975)
In re Arbitration between Federman & Miller
48 A.D.2d 787 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
46 A.D.2d 850, 361 N.Y.S.2d 183, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3494, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schlaifer-v-kaiser-nyappdiv-1974.