22 Cited authorities

  1. Rockland

    51 N.Y.2d 1 (N.Y. 1980)   Cited 317 times
    Holding that "if the court concludes that, while the parties may have made a valid agreement to arbitrate, the particular agreement that they made was of limited or restricted scope and the particular claim sought to be arbitrated is outside that scope, there will likewise be a stay of arbitration or a denial of the motion to compel arbitration."
  2. Board of Educ. v. Ambach

    70 N.Y.2d 501 (N.Y. 1987)   Cited 126 times
    Holding that in the absence of a breach of the union's duty of fair representation, the failure to exhaust all contractual remedies, including arbitration bars the employee's right to sue the employer directly
  3. Matter of Exercycle Corp.

    174 N.E.2d 463 (N.Y. 1961)   Cited 178 times
    In Matter of Exercycle Corp., 9 N.Y.2d 329, 214 N.Y.S.2d 353, 174 N.E.2d 463 (1961), the court stated that questions as to the validity of the contract at common law were for the arbitrators; however, issues of invalidity involving matters of public policy, such as fraud or duress, should be retained by the courts.
  4. Cooper v. Bruckner

    801 N.Y.S.2d 19 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)   Cited 39 times

    September 8, 2005. Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert D. Lippmann, J.), entered May 12, 2004, which granted the petition to stay arbitration, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the petition denied and the proceeding dismissed. Before: Tom, J.P., Andrias, Marlow, Sullivan and Catterson, JJ. This dispute arises out of certain agreements relating to a New York limited liability partnership in which respondent Bruckner was a non-equity partner and petitioner Cooper was a managing

  5. Matter of Long Is. Lbr. Co.

    207 N.E.2d 190 (N.Y. 1965)   Cited 85 times
    In Matter of Long Is. Lbr. Co. (Martin) (15 N.Y.2d 380, 382-383) the court stated: "Since the arbitration clause is part of a collective bargaining contract, its interpretation and enforcement come within the terms of subdivision (a) of section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act * * * Because of this legislation such cases are not dealt with as a matter of State contract law and, although State courts have jurisdiction in such cases as this, the Federal law must be followed".
  6. Buff v. Vill. of Manlius

    115 A.D.3d 1156 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)   Cited 8 times

    2014-03-21 Philip BUFF, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. VILLAGE OF MANLIUS and Mark–Paul Serafin, Mayor, Village of Manlius, Defendants–Respondents. Thomas J. Jordan, Albany, for Plaintiff–Appellant. Bond, Schoeneck & King, PLLC, Syracuse (Colin M. Leonard of Counsel), for Defendants–Respondents. Thomas J. Jordan, Albany, for Plaintiff–Appellant. Bond, Schoeneck & King, PLLC, Syracuse (Colin M. Leonard of Counsel), for Defendants–Respondents. PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, SCONIERS, AND VALENTINO

  7. Matter City School Dist., Poughkeepsie

    35 N.Y.2d 599 (N.Y. 1974)   Cited 51 times

    Argued November 18, 1974 Decided December 20, 1974 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, JOHN P. DONOHOE, J. Lloyd L. Rosenthall and Joseph D. Quinn, Jr. for appellant. James R. Sandner and Bernard F. Ashe for respondent. JONES, J. In the somewhat unusual circumstances of this case we hold that parallel procedures, each designed to challenge the refusal of a school district to appoint a teacher to a specified position, may go forward concurrently

  8. Zurich Insurance Company v. R. Elec

    773 N.Y.S.2d 560 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)   Cited 8 times
    Holding that, under New York law, "the question of whether the overall agreement is invalid is for the arbitrators" to decide
  9. Livingston Cnty. v. Civil Serv. Emps. Ass'n, Inc., Local 1000, Afscme, AFL–CIO

    956 N.Y.S.2d 774 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)

    2012-12-21 In the Matter of the Arbitration Between LIVINGSTON COUNTY, Petitioner–Appellant, and CIVIL SERVICE EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, INC., LOCAL 1000, AFSCME, AFL–CIO, Livingston County Employees Local 826 and Livingston County Employees Unit, Respondents–Respondents. Osborn, Reed & Burke, LLP, Rochester (David W. Lippitt of Counsel), for Petitioner–Appellant. Creighton, Johnsen & Giroux, Buffalo (Jonathan G. Johnsen of Counsel), for Respondents–Respondents. Osborn, Reed & Burke, LLP, Rochester

  10. Board of Educ. v. Teachers Assn

    341 N.Y.S.2d 690 (N.Y. App. Div. 1973)   Cited 41 times

    February 23, 1973. Appeal from the Supreme Court, Chautauqua County, ROLLIN A. FANCHER, J. Fudeman Renaldo ( Emanuel Tabachnick of counsel), for appellant. Brandt Laughlin, P.C. ( Stephen Teret of counsel), for respondent. GOLDMAN, P.J. The Chautauqua Central School Teachers Association (Teachers Association) appeals from an order which stayed arbitration between it and the Board of Education of the Chautauqua Central School District (School Board). The respondent School Board has recognized the