Legal Opinion · Concurrence

In re the Arbitration between SCM Corp. & Fisher Park Lane Co.

New York Court of Appeals

Decided December 2, 1976Published

1ConcurrenceFuchsberg, J.

I too vote for affirmance; however, I cannot concur with the majority’s suggestion that reformation is an arbitral issue.

With the exception of a contrary dictum contained in Matter of Agora Development Corp. (Low) (19 AD2d 126), and a Federal case relying upon the dictum (American Home Assur. Co. v American Fid. & Cas. Co., 356 F2d 690), the courts of this State have consistently held that unless the parties confer the authority upon him, an arbitrator lacks power to reform or change the contract itself (Stewart-Scott Constr. Co. v Schaefer Brewing Co., 41 AD2d 788; Matter of Glenwood Jewish…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Garrity v. Lyle Stuart, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1976
  2. In re the Arbitration between Paver & Wildfoerster & Catholic High School Ass'nNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
  3. In re the Arbitration between R. H. Macy & Co. & National Sleep Products, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1976
  4. In Re Arbitration Between De Laurentiis & Cinematografica De Las Americas, S. A.New York Court of Appeals · 1961
  5. Swartz v. SwartzAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1975

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API