Legal Opinion

In re the Arbitration between Katz & Burkin

New York Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1955PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMatthew M. Levy, J.

Benjamin Burkin, Leonard H. Burkin, 370 Fulton Ave. Corp. and Fulton-Washington Corp. (asserting that by contracts with Joseph Katz arbitration is provided for when controversies occur) served written notices upon Katz of the designation of their chosen arbitrator. The notices — which were served personally upon Katz on September 14, 1955 —• provided, in accordance with subdivision 2 of section 1458 of the Civil Practice Act, that ‘1 unless within ten days of the date of service of [these notices] of intention to conduct an arbitration, you serve a notice of motion to stay the arbitration…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Raven Electric Co. v. LinzerNew York Court of Appeals · 1951

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. In re the Arbitration between Eimco Corp. & Deering, Milliken & Co.New York Supreme Court · 1957
  2. In re the Arbitration between New York Central Railroad & Erie RailroadNew York Supreme Court · 1961
  3. In re the Arbitration between Graffagnino & Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1965
  4. In re the Arbitration between Ward Leonard Electric Co. & Local 419, International Union of Electrical, Radio & Machine WorkersNew York Supreme Court · 1958
  5. Commission of Investigation of New York v. FalconeNew York Supreme Court · 1962

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API