County of Westchester v. Mahoney
Cases that cite this one
15 later published cases cite this decision.
- Matter of Widrick (Carpinelli) (N.Y. 2018)
- Matter of Village of Walden v. Teamsters Local Union No. 445 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2025)
- Mahoney v. Hankin (2d Cir. 1988)
- Mahoney v. Hankin (2d Cir. 1988)
- In re the Arbitration between Seneca Falls Central School District & Lorenz (New York Supreme Court 1983)
- Matter of Brockway (County of Onondaga) (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2024)
- In re the Arbitration Between Widrick & Carpinelli (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
- City of Long Beach v. Long Beach Professional Firefighters Ass'n (New York Supreme Court 2014)
- New Rochelle Police Superior officers Ass'n v. City of New Rochelle (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2006)
- J. D. Structures, Inc. v. Waldbaum (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2001)
- Gonzalez v. County of Orange Department of Social Services (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1998)
- Town of New Castle v. L'Eplattenier (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
- New York State Housing Finance Agency v. Local 2110, United Auto Workers (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
- Board of Education of the Glen Cove City School District v. Steigerwald (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1994)
- East Ramapo Central School District v. Symanski (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1982)
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
OPINION OF THE COURT
On review of submissions pursuant to rule 500.2 (b) of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.2 [b]), order reversed, with costs, the petition to stay arbitration granted and the cross petition to compel arbitration dismissed. Our reading of the collective bargaining agreement as a whole establishes the parties’ plain and unambiguous intent to limit the right to demand step 3 grievance arbitration to the college and the union. Accordingly, respondent faculty member’s arbitration demand was without legal effect (cf. Matter of Horseheads Cent. School Dist. [Horsehead Teachers’ Assn.], 55 NY2d 949).
Concur: Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.