Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
McMAHAN SECURITIES CO. L.P., Petitioner-Appellant, v. AVIATOR MASTER FUND, LTD., et al., Respondents-Respondents.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Werner Kornreich, J.), entered May 16, 2008, which denied petitioner's application to stay arbitration and dismissed the proceeding, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
The court correctly found that respondents were the customers of petitioner, a member of the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) (now the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority) (see Financial Network Inv. Corp. v. Becker, 305 A.D.2d 187, 188, 762 N.Y.S.2d 25 [2003] ), and therefore that petitioner must arbitrate pursuant to Rule 12200 of the NASD Code of Arbitration. Contrary to petitioner's contention, no waiver of the obligation to arbitrate is contained in the subscription agreements entered into by respondents and nonparty Strategy Real Estate Investments, Ltd.
Petitioner, which is not a signatory to any of the agreements, is not entitled to enforce the forum selection clause as a third-party beneficiary (see Mendel v. Henry Phipps Plaza W., Inc., 16 A.D.3d 112, 789 N.Y.S.2d 885 [2005], affd. 6 N.Y.3d 783, 811 N.Y.S.2d 294, 844 N.E.2d 748 [2006] ). The clear and unambiguous language of paragraph 13 of the subscription agreements explicitly excludes all but the signatories and their successors from its provisions. Nor has petitioner shown that it is a closely related entity so as to be entitled to enforce the forum selection clause (see Freeford Ltd. v. Pendleton, 53 A.D.3d 32, 38-39, 857 N.Y.S.2d 62 [2008] ).
Thank you for your feedback!
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.
Decided: December 16, 2008
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)