Trustees of the District Council No. 9 Painting Industry Insurance Fund v. Pure Glass, LLC

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided March 8, 2021·No. 1:21-cv-01922·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK TRUSTEES OF THE DISTRICT COUNCIL NO. 9 PAINTING INDUSTRY INSURANCE FUND, TRUSTEES OF THE DISTRICT COUNCIL NO. 9 PAINTING INDUSTRY ANNUITY FUND, and DISTRICT COUNCIL NO. 9 INTERNATIONAL UNION OF PAINTERS 21 Civ. 1922 (KPF) AND ALLIED TRADES AFL-CIO, ORDER Petitioners, -v.- PURE GLASS, LCC, Respondent. KATHERINE POLK FAILLA, District Judge: On March 5, 2021, Petitioners filed a petition to confirm an arbitration award. (Dkt. #1). Proceedings to confirm an arbitration award must be “treated as akin to a motion for summary judgment.” D.H. Blair & Co., Inc. v. Gottdiener, 462 F.3d 95, 109 (2d Cir. 2006). Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Petitioners shall move for confirmation of the arbitral award in the form of a motion for summary judgment — in accordance with Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 56.1 of the Southern District of New York — by April 7, 2021. Respondent’s opposition, if any, is due on May 7, 2021. Petitioners’ reply, if any, is due May 21, 2021. Petitioners shall serve the petition upon Respondent electronically and by overnight mail no later than March 15, 2021, and shall file an affidavit of such service with the court no later than March 22, 2021. SO ORDERED. Dated: March 8, 2021 hh filo New York, New York KATHERINE POLK FAILLA United States District Judge

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

Trustees of the District Council No. 9 Painting Industry Insurance Fund v. Pure Glass, LLC, (S.D.N.Y. 2021).

Trustees of the District Council No. 9 Painting Industry Insurance Fund v. Pure Glass, LLC (Trustees of the District Council No. 9 Painting Industry Insurance Fund v. Pure Glass, LLC) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Blair & Co., Inc. v. Gottdiener
462 F.3d 95 (Second Circuit, 2006)