IN RE: Arbitration Between R.H. DONNELLEY CORPORATION (2002)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

IN RE: Arbitration Between R.H. DONNELLEY CORPORATION, Petitioner-Appellant, v. IMS HEALTH INCORPORATED, et al., Respondents-Respondents.

Decided: January 08, 2002

TOM, J.P., MAZZARELLI, ANDRIAS, ELLERIN and MARLOW, JJ.

John S. Kiernan, for Petitioner-Appellant. James H. Carter and Richard Schwed, for Respondents-Respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Alice Schlesinger, J.), entered August 20, 2001, which denied petitioner's application to stay arbitration, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The broad arbitration clause in the 1996 agreement between petitioner R.H. Donnelley and respondent Nielsen Media Research, Inc. commits to the arbitrators the issue of whether IMS Health Incorporated is a “permitted assign” within the meaning of the contract, and therefore whether it is entitled to demand arbitration (see, Matter of Smith Barney Shearson Inc. v. Sacharow, 91 N.Y.2d 39, 45-47, 666 N.Y.S.2d 990, 689 N.E.2d 884). The dispute involves only the issues of whether IMS is an assignee and how taxes are to be calculated under that 1996 agreement, and thus does not necessitate invocation of the arbitration clause in a subsequent 1998 agreement, between IMS and Nielsen, or the consolidation of separate arbitrations over a party's objection.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network