Legal Opinion

In re the Arbitration between Layton-Blumenthal, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided April 22, 1952PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Per curiam

The burden is upon a party applying to compel another to arbitrate, to establish that there was a plain intent by agreement to limit the parties to that method of deciding disputes. “ No one is under a duty to resort to arbitration unless by clear language he has so agreed ” (Matter of Lehman v. Ostrovsky, 264 N. Y. 130, 132). In this case, respondent-appellant bought the goods under spot orders placed with petitioner verbally and entered on its forms. These orders were produced and contained no arbitration clause. Petitioner claims that before delivery of the goods was made it prepared and…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Matter of Lehman v. OstrovskyNew York Court of Appeals · 1934

3Cited by9 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. Marben Realty Co. v. SweeneyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
  4. In re the Arbitration between Garrett Corp. & Frank IX & Sons New York Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1959
  5. In re the Arbitration between Milton L. Ehrlich, Inc. & Unit Frame & Floor Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1958

4 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