Opinion
September 23, 1947.
Proceeding in the matter of the arbitration of the controversies between Tugee Laces, Inc., and Mary Muffet, Inc. On petitioner's motion to stay the proceeding.
Motion granted.
Samuel Rubin, of New York City, for petitioner.
McLanahan, Merritt Ingraham, of New York City (Robert R. Bruce and Andrew M. Calamari, both of New York City, of counsel), for respondent.
Petitioner moves to stay an arbitration proceeding. Respondent is a foreign corporation, doing business in this state without having obtained a certificate authorizing it to conduct business. The contract involved was made in the City of New York. Petitioner contends that pursuant to Section 218, General Corporation Law, respondent is barred from instituting and maintaining proceedings against petitioner in this State. It has been held recently that the prohibitation contained in Section 218 is applicable to arbitration proceedings as well as to actions Matter of Vanguard Films (Samuel Goldwyn Productions, Inc.), 188 Misc. 796, 67 N.Y.S.2d 893; Matter of Levys (Gentry, Inc), ___ Misc. ___, 73 N.Y.S.2d 801. I am in accord with these holdings. It seems that the underlying policy of Section 218 would require an interpretation preventing the institution of an arbitration proceeding as well as an action. No decision in this State has held to the contrary.
In view of the necessity for staying the arbitration by virtue of Section 218, General Corporation Law, it becomes unnecessary to rule upon petitioner's other contention, that the limitations contained in the contract prevent the institution of an arbitration proceeding because respondent failed to give petitioner notice of its claim within 10 days after receipt of the goods.
Motion is granted. Settle order.