Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990

Broderick v. Suffolk County Bar Ass'n

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided January 22, 1990

157 A.D.2d 780; 550 N.Y.S.2d 378; 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 728

Cases that cite this one

4 later published cases cite this decision.

Robert J. Lyeth v. Chrysler Corporation, Robert Abrams, Attorney General of the State of New York, Intervening (2d Cir. 1991)
Matter of Government Empls. Ins. Co. v. Schussheim (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
In re the Arbitration between New York State Correctional Officers & Police Benevolent Ass'n (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
Goldsborough v. New York State Department of Correctional Services (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1995)

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

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to vacate or modify an arbitration award dated November 17, 1987, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Roncallo, J.), entered March 22, 1988, which, in effect, dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The petitioner has failed to demonstrate that the arbitrators improperly prevented him from submitting relevant evidence or from conducting cross-examination during the arbitration hearing. The record does not contain any factual evidence to support the petitioner’s assertions in this regard. While this lack of evidence is attributable to the fact that the minutes of the hearing were not recorded, the petitioner cannot rely upon this fact to support his claims, inasmuch as he participated in the arbitration with knowledge that no record was being kept and thereby waived any issue regarding the lack of such record (see, CPLR 7506 [f]; Matter of Reale [Healy N Y. Corp.], 54 AD2d 1039; see also, 8 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Prac ¶ ¶ 7506.19, 7506.26).

Accordingly, he has failed to sustain his burden of demonstrating a ground for vacatur or modification of the award, and the proceeding was properly dismissed. Brown, J. P., Kunzeman, Sullivan and Balletta, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.