Opinion
April 30, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (William Wetzel, J.).
Respondent failed to make the appropriate showing that the arbitrators' refusal to grant an adjournment of the hearing was an abuse of discretion ( see, Matter of Herskovitz [Kaye Assocs.], 170 A.D.2d 272, 274, lv dismissed 78 N.Y.2d 899). Respondent did not respond to the arbitrators' request for convenient dates, did not provide substantiating details of the health problems of its President's husband that would prevent her attendance at the hearing for an unspecified period of time, did not indicate any pertinent evidence she would present, and did not explain why it could not send an attorney or other representative to the hearing with affidavits or other documentary evidence in support of its adjournment request ( compare, Matter of Insurance Co. v. St. Paul Fire Mar. Ins. Co., 215 A.D.2d 386, 387; Matter of Omega Contr. v. Maropakis Contr., 160 A.D.2d 942).
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Ellerin, Rubin, Williams and Andrias, JJ.