Seneca Insurance v. Ruday Realty Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Seneca Insurance v. Ruday Realty Corp.

87 A.D.3d 579, 929 N.Y.2d 740

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided August 9, 2011·Published

Opinion

Contrary to the contentions of the defendants Ruday Realty [580]*580Corp. and Crosstown Management Corp. (hereinafter together the appellants), vacatur and/or an increase of the subject mediation award is not warranted since the award did not violate a strong public policy, was not irrational, and did not manifestly exceed a specific, enumerated limitation on the mediator’s power (see Matter of Town of Callicoon [Civil Serv. Empls. Assn., Town of Callicoon Unit], 70 NY2d 907, 909 [1987]; see also Matter of Local 456, Intl. Bhd. of Teamsters v City of Yonkers, 75 AD3d 555 [2010]; Matter of Scher Law Firm, LLP v 87-10 51st Ave. Owners Corp., 52 AD3d 611 [2008]; Matter of Balis v Chubb Group of Ins. Cos., 50 AD3d 682 [2008]).

The appellants’ remaining contentions are without merit. Angiolillo, J.P., Florio, Belen and Miller, JJ., concur. [Prior Case History: 26 Misc 3d 1215(A), 2010 NY Slip Op 50105(11).]

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

Contrary to the contentions of the defendants Ruday Realty [580]*580Corp. and Crosstown Management Corp. (hereinafter together the appellants), vacatur and/or an increase of the subject mediation award is not warranted since the award did not violate a strong public policy, was not irrational, and did not manifestly exceed a specific, enumerated limitation on the mediator’s power (see Matter of Town of Callicoon [Civil Serv. Empls. Assn., Town of Callicoon Unit], 70 NY2d 907, 909 [1987]; see also Matter of Local 456, Intl. Bhd. of Teamsters v City of Yonkers, 75 AD3d 555 [2010]; Matter of Scher Law Firm, LLP v 87-10 51st Ave. Owners Corp., 52 AD3d 611 [2008]; Matter of Balis v Chubb Group of Ins. Cos., 50 AD3d 682 [2008]).

The appellants’ remaining contentions are without merit. Angiolillo, J.P., Florio, Belen and Miller, JJ., concur. [Prior Case History: 26 Misc 3d 1215(A), 2010 NY Slip Op 50105(11).]

Seneca Insurance v. Ruday Realty Corp., 87 A.D.3d 579, 929 N.Y.2d 740 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

87 A.D.3d 579 (Seneca Insurance v. Ruday Realty Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related