Town of Stony Point v. Stony Point Policemen's Benevolent Ass'n

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Town of Stony Point v. Stony Point Policemen's Benevolent Ass'n

133 A.D.2d 635, 519 N.Y.S.2d 743, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 51675

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

DecidedOctober 5, 1987

StatusPublished

This text of 133 A.D.2d 635 (Town of Stony Point v. Stony Point Policemen's Benevolent Ass'n) 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

Town of Stony Point v. Stony Point Policemen's Benevolent Ass'n, 133 A.D.2d 635, 519 N.Y.S.2d 743, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 51675 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to stay arbitration, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Stolarik, J.), dated May 22, 1986, which granted the application and denied the cross application to compel arbitration.

[636]*636Ordered that the order is reversed, with costs, the application is denied and the cross application is granted.

The agreement in question provides for two means of dispute resolution. Article VI deals with questions or differences of opinion which may arise in the administration of the agreement. This article expressly provides for arbitration by PERB. Appendix A provides a mechanism for resolving grievances brought by individual employees.

At issue in this dispute is a difference of opinion between the parties as to the meaning of the word "charges” as used in the last sentence of article XIX. Clearly, this falls within the ambit of article VI permitting arbitration by PERB. We do not agree with the IAS court that a party to the agreement must resort to the grievance procedures in appendix A before invoking the interpretation provisions of article VI. Lawrence, J. P., Eiber, Spatt and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

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

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to stay arbitration, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Stolarik, J.), dated May 22, 1986, which granted the application and denied the cross application to compel arbitration.

[636]*636Ordered that the order is reversed, with costs, the application is denied and the cross application is granted.

The agreement in question provides for two means of dispute resolution. Article VI deals with questions or differences of opinion which may arise in the administration of the agreement. This article expressly provides for arbitration by PERB. Appendix A provides a mechanism for resolving grievances brought by individual employees.

At issue in this dispute is a difference of opinion between the parties as to the meaning of the word "charges” as used in the last sentence of article XIX. Clearly, this falls within the ambit of article VI permitting arbitration by PERB. We do not agree with the IAS court that a party to the agreement must resort to the grievance procedures in appendix A before invoking the interpretation provisions of article VI. Lawrence, J. P., Eiber, Spatt and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

133 A.D.2d 635, 519 N.Y.S.2d 743, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 51675, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/town-of-stony-point-v-stony-point-policemens-benevolent-assn-nyappdiv-1987.