From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Vintage Flooring & Tile, Inc. v. DCM of NY, LLC

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Dec 3, 2014
123 A.D.3d 731 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)

Opinion

2013-09057

12-03-2014

In the Matter of VINTAGE FLOORING & TILE, INC., respondent, v. DCM OF NY, LLC, appellant.

Kushnick Pallaci, PLLC, Melville, N.Y. (Jeffrey A. Lhuillier, Gina M. Wischhusen, and Vincent T. Pallaci of counsel), for appellant. Anthony C. Giordano, P.C., Garden City, N.Y., and Kenneth S. Pelsinger, P.C., Levittown, N.Y., for respondent (one brief filed).


Kushnick Pallaci, PLLC, Melville, N.Y. (Jeffrey A. Lhuillier, Gina M. Wischhusen, and Vincent T. Pallaci of counsel), for appellant.

Anthony C. Giordano, P.C., Garden City, N.Y., and Kenneth S. Pelsinger, P.C., Levittown, N.Y., for respondent (one brief filed).

Opinion In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to confirm an arbitration award, DCM of NY, LLC, appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Demarest, J.), dated July 11, 2013, which, upon an amended order of the same court dated April 2, 2013, inter alia, granting the petition and confirming the award, is in favor of the petitioner and against it in the principal sum of $86,889.88. ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Judicial review of an arbitrator's award is extremely limited (see Matter of Town of Babylon v. Carson, 111 A.D.3d 951, 953, 976 N.Y.S.2d 501 ). A court may vacate an arbitration award pursuant to CPLR 7511(b)(1)(iii) “only if it violates a strong public policy, is irrational, or clearly exceeds a specifically enumerated limitation on the arbitrator's power” (Matter of Falzone [New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co.], 15 N.Y.3d 530, 534, 914 N.Y.S.2d 67, 939 N.E.2d 1197 ). An award is irrational when there is no proof whatever to justify the award (see Matter of Susan D. Settenbrino, P.C. v. Barroga–Hayes, 89 A.D.3d 1094, 1095, 933 N.Y.S.2d 409 ).

Contrary to the appellant's contentions, it failed to show that the arbitration award was irrational. Therefore, the Supreme Court properly denied that branch of the appellant's motion which was to vacate the arbitration award, and properly granted the petition to confirm the arbitration award.

CHAMBERS, J.P., SGROI, MILLER and BARROS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Vintage Flooring & Tile, Inc. v. DCM of NY, LLC

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Dec 3, 2014
123 A.D.3d 731 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
Case details for

Vintage Flooring & Tile, Inc. v. DCM of NY, LLC

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Vintage Flooring & Tile, Inc., respondent, v. DCM of NY…

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

Date published: Dec 3, 2014

Citations

123 A.D.3d 731 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 8448
995 N.Y.S.2d 916

Citing Cases

Fagan v. Vill. of Harriman

Judicial review of an arbitrator's award is extremely limited (see Wien & Malkin LLP v Helmsley-Spear, Inc.,…

Peterson v. Katonah-Lewisboro UFSD

Judicial review of an arbitrator's award is extremely limited (see Matter of Town of Babylon v. Carson, 111…