Opinion
2012-05-17
Jay S. BLUMENKOPF, Petitioner–Appellant–Respondent, v. PROSKAUER ROSE LLP, Respondent–Respondent–Appellant.
Liddle & Robinson, LLP, New York (James R. Hubbard of counsel), for appellant-respondent. Proskauer Rose LLP, New York (David M. Lederkramer of counsel), for respondent-appellant.
Liddle & Robinson, LLP, New York (James R. Hubbard of counsel), for appellant-respondent. Proskauer Rose LLP, New York (David M. Lederkramer of counsel), for respondent-appellant.
Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Emily J. Goodman, J.), entered January 20, 2010, denying petitioner's motion to vacate an April 15, 2008 arbitration award in favor of respondent, and dismissing the proceeding, unanimously modified, on the law, to add a provision confirming the award pursuant to CPLR 7511(e), and otherwise affirmed, without costs.
“Petitioner failed to meet [his] heavy burden of establishing that the arbitration award was irrational, or in violation of any of the grounds enumerated in CPLR 7511(b)” ( Matter of Cherry v. New York State Ins. Fund, 83 A.D.3d 446, 446–447, 920 N.Y.S.2d 342 [2011]; *886 Kalyanaram v. New York Inst. of Tech., 79 A.D.3d 418, 419, 913 N.Y.S.2d 159 [2010], lv. denied 17 N.Y.3d 712, 2011 WL 4916491 [2011] ).
The award should have been confirmed pursuant to CPLR 7511(e), which mandates confirmation upon denial of a motion to vacate or modify ( see Matter of White v. Department of Law of State of N.Y., 184 A.D.2d 229, 584 N.Y.S.2d 555 [1992], lv. denied 80 N.Y.2d 759, 591 N.Y.S.2d 137, 605 N.E.2d 873 [1992] ).