Windsor Metal Fabrications, Ltd. v. Vescom Systems, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Windsor Metal Fabrications, Ltd. v. Vescom Systems, Inc.

280 A.D.2d 607, 720 N.Y.S.2d 804, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1644

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 20, 2001·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to vacate an arbitration award dated July 2, 1999, the petitioner appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Sherwood, J.), dated October 29, 1999, as denied the petition and granted the cross application to confirm the award.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

[608] The appellant, a fabricator of structural steel, submitted a breach of contract claim to arbitration pursuant to an arbitration clause in its original contract with the respondent. During the arbitration proceedings, the appellant offered evidence of what it claimed was a second contractual relationship formed by the respondent’s acquiescence and conduct of accepting the deliveries of steel.

The arbitrators considered the disputed material and excluded much of it because they determined that it evidenced an unsuccessful pbst-termination settlement negotiation and not a second contractual relationship. An arbitration award is not subject to judicial review for errors of law or of fact (see, SCM Corp. v Fisher Park Lane Co., 40 NY2d 788).

The appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Bracken, Acting P. J., Altman, Goldstein and McGinity, 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 vacate an arbitration award dated July 2, 1999, the petitioner appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Sherwood, J.), dated October 29, 1999, as denied the petition and granted the cross application to confirm the award.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

[608] The appellant, a fabricator of structural steel, submitted a breach of contract claim to arbitration pursuant to an arbitration clause in its original contract with the respondent. During the arbitration proceedings, the appellant offered evidence of what it claimed was a second contractual relationship formed by the respondent’s acquiescence and conduct of accepting the deliveries of steel.

The arbitrators considered the disputed material and excluded much of it because they determined that it evidenced an unsuccessful pbst-termination settlement negotiation and not a second contractual relationship. An arbitration award is not subject to judicial review for errors of law or of fact (see, SCM Corp. v Fisher Park Lane Co., 40 NY2d 788).

The appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Bracken, Acting P. J., Altman, Goldstein and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Windsor Metal Fabrications, Ltd. v. Vescom Systems, Inc., 280 A.D.2d 607, 720 N.Y.S.2d 804, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1644 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

280 A.D.2d 607 (Windsor Metal Fabrications, Ltd. v. Vescom Systems, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related