From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

A. Burgart, Inc. v. Foster-Lipkins Corp.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jul 6, 1972
30 N.Y.2d 901 (N.Y. 1972)

Summary

denying motion to stay arbitration, directing parties to proceed to arbitration, and staying the lien foreclosure action in its entirety

Summary of this case from Flowcon, Inc. v. Andiva LLC

Opinion

Argued June 8, 1972

Decided July 6, 1972

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department, DANIEL E. MACKEN, J.

Jerrold Morgulas and Frederick Cohen for appellants.

Thomas E. Lenweaver and Donald G. Houghton for respondent.


Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Chief Judge FULD and Judges BURKE, SCILEPPI, BERGAN, BREITEL, JASEN and GIBSON.


Summaries of

A. Burgart, Inc. v. Foster-Lipkins Corp.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jul 6, 1972
30 N.Y.2d 901 (N.Y. 1972)

denying motion to stay arbitration, directing parties to proceed to arbitration, and staying the lien foreclosure action in its entirety

Summary of this case from Flowcon, Inc. v. Andiva LLC
Case details for

A. Burgart, Inc. v. Foster-Lipkins Corp.

Case Details

Full title:A. BURGART, INC., Respondent, v. FOSTER-LIPKINS CORP. et al., Appellants…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jul 6, 1972

Citations

30 N.Y.2d 901 (N.Y. 1972)
335 N.Y.S.2d 562
287 N.E.2d 269

Citing Cases

Tradesource, Inc. v. Ancor, Inc.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs. Contrary to the defendants' contentions, the plaintiff's…

Stark v. Molod Spitz Desantis

Nevertheless, under CPLR 7503(a), it can provide the basis for an order compelling arbitration and…