Legal Opinion
Schlaifer v. Sedlow
New York Court of Appeals
Decided October 14, 1980PublishedCited by 48 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
2Per curiam
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs. Whether the general release signed by respondent was the product of economic duress and what effect should be given to it in any event are issues to be resolved by the arbitrator pursuant to the arbitration agreement made by the parties.
On March 31, 1964 respondent Sedlow and three individuals entered into a stockholders agreement with Charles Schlaifer & Company, Inc., an advertising agency and the corporate appellant. On the following day Sedlow and the corporation entered into a related employment…
3Cases cited7 opinions
- In Re the Arbitration Between Weinrott & CarpNew York Court of Appeals · 1973
- Matter of Lipman (Haeuser Shellac Co.)New York Court of Appeals · 1942
- Matter of Am. Ins. Co (Messinger)New York Court of Appeals · 1977
- County of Sullivan v. Edward L. Nezelek, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1977
- In re the Arbitration between Minkin & HalperinNew York Court of Appeals · 1952
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by48 opinions
- Primex International Corp. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1997
- Sherrill v. Grayco Builders, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1985
- Levine v. Advest, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
- In re the Estate of CassoneNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- In Re the Arbitration Between Clawson & Habilitat, Inc.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1989
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.