Opinion
7007N Index 650823/17
06-28-2018
In re Andrew POMA, Petitioner–Respondent, v. Adem ARICI, Respondent–Appellant.
Law Office of Michael H. Joseph, P.L.L.C., White Plains (Michael H. Joseph of counsel), for appellant. Woods Lonergan PLLC, New York (Annie E. Causey of counsel), for respondent.
Law Office of Michael H. Joseph, P.L.L.C., White Plains (Michael H. Joseph of counsel), for appellant.
Woods Lonergan PLLC, New York (Annie E. Causey of counsel), for respondent.
Acosta, P.J., Sweeny, Webber, Kahn, Oing, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen Bransten, J.), entered on or about August 18, 2017, which denied respondent's cross motion to confirm the arbitration award and granted the petition to vacate the award, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Respondent's notice of arbitration did not contain the requisite language of CPLR 7503(c) and, therefore, petitioner was not precluded from raising threshold arbitration issues before the court ( Matter of Blamowski [Munson Transp.], 91 N.Y.2d 190, 195, 668 N.Y.S.2d 148, 690 N.E.2d 1254 [1997] ; Cooper v. Bruckner, 21 A.D.3d 758, 759–760, 801 N.Y.S.2d 19 [1st Dept. 2005] ). Threshold issues include whether the parties complied with the agreement (see Matter of CPS 1 Realty LP v. R.P. Brennan Gen. Contrs. & Bldrs., Inc., 66 A.D.3d 418, 418, 885 N.Y.S.2d 601 [1st Dept. 2009], lv denied 13 N.Y.3d 713, 2009 WL 4794400 [2009] ). "Arbitration agreements are contracts and their meaning is to be determined from the language employed by the parties under accepted rules of contract law" ( Matter of Cowen & Co. v. Anderson, 76 N.Y.2d 318, 321, 559 N.Y.S.2d 225, 558 N.E.2d 27 [1990] ). By its plain language, the subject arbitration clause states that "[a]ny dispute arising under the terms of this agreement shall be resolved by the parties voluntarily submitting to binding arbitration," thus, where petitioner did not agree to arbitrate, the petition to vacate the award was correctly granted.