Summary
vacating award and remanding to arbitration panel for new hearing without considering details of arguments and evidence not presented or either party's likelihood of success, and noting that "the record does not clearly demonstrate what evidence was precluded"
Summary of this case from Ahmed v. Oak Mgmt. Corp.Opinion
2772.
Decided May 25, 2004.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (James A. Yates, J.), entered January 28, 2003, which, inter alia, granted respondent's cross motion to vacate the arbitration award against it and remanded the matter for a new arbitration before a new panel of arbitrators, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Brown Raysman Millstein Felder Steiner LLP, New York (John J. Gallagher of counsel), for appellant.
Rivelis, Pawa Blum, LLP, New York (Howard Blum of counsel), for respondent.
Before: Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Saxe, Marlow, JJ.
The arbitration award against respondent was properly vacated in light of the appearance of impropriety created by the involvement of the arbitrators in the parties' dispute over prepayment of arbitration fees, a matter in which the arbitrators had a direct financial interest ( see Matter of Grendi v. LNL Constr. Mgt. Corp., 175 A.D.2d 775; see also Catalyst Waste-to-Energy Corp. of Long Beach v. City of Long Beach, 164 A.D.2d 817, appeal dismissed 76 N.Y.2d 1017).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.