Opinion
May 25, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Carol H. Arber, J.).
Although the record provides substantial support for the allegations of misconduct by respondents, the remedies ordered by the IAS Court were less than judicious, warranting the relief we accord. While the court was technically empowered to intervene as it did (see, Matter of Paglia v Staten Is. Little League, 38 A.D.2d 575; Matter of Auer v Dressel, 306 N.Y. 427; CPLR 4001), contrary to respondents' urgings, the measures ordered substantially interfered in the internal workings of the union, contrary to general Federal and State policy (see, Matter of Jacobs v Board of Educ., 64 A.D.2d 148, 157-158; Matter of Gilheany v Civil Serv. Empls. Assn., 59 A.D.2d 834, 836; Miller v Building Serv. Maintenance Miscellaneous Empls. Union Local 400, 16 A.D.2d 211, 213; Gustafson v American Train Dispatchers' Assn., 788 F.2d 1284, 1287). Furthermore, the court proceeded inexpediently in failing to heed the desire of the parties to attempt settlement of their dispute at a conference or to allow the parties to resolve their factual disagreements at a hearing. Essentially, the court's orders issued without respondents' side of the controversy being given due consideration.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Asch and Williams, JJ.