Legal Opinion · Dissent
In re the Arbitration between Binghamton Civil Service Forum & City of Binghamton
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided April 14, 1977Published
1Dissent
Kane, J. (dissenting).
We agree that the arbitrator’s decision is internally flawed and indorse the criticism leveled at his reasoning. However, the ability of the judiciary to review an arbitrator’s award is limited by statute (CPLR 7511, subds [b], [c]) and errors of fact or law committed by him are not ordinarily subject to correction by the courts (Matter of Associated Teachers of Huntington v Board of Educ., Union Free School Dist. No. 3, Town of Huntington, 33 NY2d 229, 235). When the authority of an arbitrator is questioned our task is to determine whether he interpreted the agreement…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Rokowsky v. Finance AdministratorNew York Court of Appeals · 1977
- Cohoes City School District v. Cohoes Teachers Ass'nNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
- Board of Education of Union Free School District No. 3 of Huntington v. Associated Teachers of Huntington, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1972
- Associated Teachers of Huntington, Inc. v. Board of EducationNew York Court of Appeals · 1973
- Union Free School District No. 2 v. NyquistNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.