McCloskey & Co. v. American Arbitration Ass'n
Cases that cite this one
7 later published cases cite this decision.
- Fleming Companies, Inc. v. Tru Discount Foods (Okla. Civ. App. 1998)
- Metropolitan District Commission v. Connecticut Resources Recovery Authority (Conn. App. Ct. 2011)
- Cristwood Cont. v. Bridgeport Com. Hlth., No. Cv94 0316997s (Aug. 23, 1996) (Connecticut Superior Court 1996)
- State, Dpw v. Ecap Construction Co., No. Cv 98 0577143 S (Jul. 1, 1998) (Connecticut Superior Court 1998)
- Bridgeport Hospital v. Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities (Conn. 1995)
- Kainen Starr v. Siegel, O'connor, No. Cv 93-0526200s (Aug. 22, 1994) (Connecticut Superior Court 1994)
- Waterbury v. Bd. of Arbitration Mediation, No. 505606 (Oct. 14, 1993) (Connecticut Superior Court 1993)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
This is an appeal by the defendant subcontractor, C. N. Flagg and Company, Inc., from a judgment for the plaintiff, McCloskey and Com
In an earlier case, Gaer Bros., Inc. v. Mott, 144 Conn. 303, 309, 130 A.2d 804, we approved the intervention of the court in arbitration proceedings by invoking the equitable powers of the court. We concluded that fraud and partiality vitiate an award under our statutes as well as under the common law. In that case this court stated (p. 309): “If courts can set aside an award for the partiality and collusion of arbitrators, they should have the power to interrupt proceedings when, in a plenary action before an award, one of the parties can prove partiality and collusion in the arbitration proceedings.” It was determined that there was no adequate remedy at law, and that, therefore, invoicing the equitable powers of the court was an appropriate remedy. See Two Sisters, Inc. v. Gosch & Co., 171 Conn. 493, 500, 370 A.2d 1020.
In this case there is no claim of fraud or partiality. Proof of the arbitrators’ fraud and partiality, existing before the arbitration proceedings began, would constitute grounds for avoiding the agreement to submit the controversy to those arbi
There is error, the judgment is set aside and the ease is remanded with direction to render judgment for the defendant C. N. Flagg and Company, Inc.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.