Opinion
No. 73 SSM 39.
Decided February 14, 2008.
APPEAL from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, entered August 23, 2007. The Appellate Division, with two Justices dissenting, affirmed an order and judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Marilyn Shafer, J.), which had granted petitioner's motion to vacate an arbitration award insofar as it awarded respondent $48,000 on his counterclaim.
The arbitrators awarded petitioner $122,000 for respondent's margin debt plus interest, and awarded respondent $48,000 on his counterclaim for compensatory damages.
The Appellate Division majority concluded that the arbitration panel acted in excess of its authority when granting the counterclaim award. The dissent concluded that the counter-claim did not necessarily arise out of the negotiation for the stipulation of settlement; that the arbitration panel did not set forth any factual basis for its counterclaim awards, and that given petitioner's heavy burden to vacate the arbitration award it could not be said that its petition and supporting papers could serve as a basis for the vacatur.
Lehman Bros., Inc. v Cox, 43 AD3d 352, reversed.
Law Offices of Isaac M. Zucker, PLLC, Garden City ( Barry M. Bordetsky of counsel), for appellant.
Alonso, Andalkar Kahn, P.C., New York City ( Erin E. Mac Avoy of counsel), for respondent.
Before: Chief Judge KAYE and Judges CIPARICK, GRAFFEO, READ, SMITH, PIGOTT and JONES.
OPINION OF THE COURT
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals ( 22 NYCRR 500.11), order reversed, with costs, petition denied in its entirety and respondent's cross motion, insofar as it sought to confirm the arbitrator's award to him of $48,000, granted. Petitioner Lehman Brothers failed to meet its heavy burden to vacate the arbitration award on respondent Cox's counterclaim.