Silver v. Pilzer

59 A.D.2d 680, 398 N.Y.S.2d 662, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13616
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 25, 1977
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 59 A.D.2d 680 (Silver v. Pilzer) 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
Silver v. Pilzer, 59 A.D.2d 680, 398 N.Y.S.2d 662, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13616 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered May 26, 1977, dismissing the petition and directing the parties to proceed to arbitration, unanimously reversed, on the law, and the petition to stay arbitration is [681]*681granted, with $40 costs and disbursements of this appeal to appellant. Louis Silver and Paul Pilzer are the principal shareholders of Silver-Pilzer Co., Inc. In September, 1971 they entered into a shareholders agreement which outlined the rights and responsibilities related to capitalization and transfers of the stock of the corporation. The agreement also contained a clause which provided that: "Any and all disputes and controversies arising out of or in connection with this Agreement * * * shall be determined by arbitration in the City of New York”. Silver and Pilzer had a disagreement with regard to management of the corporation, and Pilzer served Silver with a demand for arbitration specifying the points of dispute. Silver moved to stay arbitration, which was denied by Special Term. We would reverse. The shareholders’ agreement deals with capitalization of the corporation and related matters, but does not contain provisions related to management of the corporation. The arbitration clause contained in it cannot therefore be invoked to compel arbitration of the management dispute outlined in the demand for arbitration. This court will not by implication or construction extend the scope of the agreement to arbitrate (Matter of Riverdale Fabrics Corp. [Tillinghast-Stiles Co.], 306 NY 288, 289), and we have therefore directed a stay of arbitration. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Lupiano, Birns and Lane, JJ.

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

Related

In re the Arbitration between Lubin & Schlesinger, Inc. & Scheinberg
168 Misc. 2d 291 (New York Supreme Court, 1996)
Bowmer v. Bowmer
406 N.E.2d 760 (New York Court of Appeals, 1980)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
59 A.D.2d 680, 398 N.Y.S.2d 662, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13616, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/silver-v-pilzer-nyappdiv-1977.