Sperling v. Newtown Laundry Service, Inc.

264 A.D. 878, 35 N.Y.S.2d 588, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5218
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 15, 1942·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Appeal from an order denying a motion to stay arbitration proceedings under subdivision 2 of section 1458 of the Civil Practice Act. Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Petitioner was a member of the union of laundry workers and in the employ of the laundry operator at the time the latter made the contract with the union. Petitioner knew of the contract and that it was made by the union in his behalf as ,one of the members of the union. He also knew his wages, hours and other interests ;wcre served by the provisions of the contract. He became bound thereby. It contained the arbitration clause he now seeks to avoid. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, ■'Johnston, Adel and Close, JJ., concur.

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

Sperling v. Newtown Laundry Service, Inc., 264 A.D. 878, 35 N.Y.S.2d 588, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5218 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1942).

264 A.D. 878 (Sperling v. Newtown Laundry Service, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re the Arbitration between Sturiale & Cliffcorn Answering Service, Inc.
22 A.D.2d 819 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1964)
Palidoro v. Feuer Transportation, Inc.
35 Misc. 2d 385 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1962)
In re Arbitration between Spilkewitz & Pepper
34 Misc. 2d 746 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1957)