Legal Opinion
Fiveco, Inc. v. Haber
New York Court of Appeals
Decided July 1, 2008PublishedCited by 40 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Pigott, J.
This appeal requires us to determine whether an untimely petition to permanently stay arbitration brought by petitioner Fiveco, Inc. falls under the exception to the statutory limitation period articulated in Matter of Matarasso (Continental Cas. Co.) (56 NY2d 264 [1982]). We hold that it does not; thus, the petition is time-barred and the parties’ dispute must be submitted to arbitration.
In November 1997, respondent Bruce Haber entered into two virtually identical installation and security agreements with Fiveco’s predecessor-in-interest. The agreements covered…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Primex International Corp. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1997
- In re the Arbitration between Waldron & GoddessNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- In re the Arbitration between Matarasso & Continental Casualty Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1982
- God's Battalion of Prayer Pentecostal Church, Inc. v. Miele AssociatesNew York Court of Appeals · 2006
- In Re the Arbitration Between Steck & State Farm InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Raniere v. Citigroup Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2011
- LJL 33rd Street Associates, LLC v. Pitcairn Properties Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2013
- Dixon v. NBCUniversal Media, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2013
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. UrbanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- Jalas v. HalperinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.