IN RE: MPOW TECHNOLOGY CO. (2026)

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Nancy M. Bannon, J.), entered June 2, 2025, which denied the petition to vacate an arbitration award, dated February 3, 2025, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Supreme Court properly denied the petition and confirmed the arbitration award because petitioner failed to demonstrate that the arbitrator exceeded his power or that the award violates a strong public policy, is irrational, or clearly exceeds a specifically enumerated limitation on the arbitrator's power (CPLR 7511[b], [e];  see Wien & Malkin LLP v. Helmsley–Spear, Inc., 6 N.Y.3d 471, 481, 813 N.Y.S.2d 691, 846 N.E.2d 1201 [2006], cert dismissed 548 U.S. 940, 127 S.Ct. 34, 165 L.Ed.2d 1012 [2006] ).

Citing governing law, the arbitrator determined that the parties' voluntary stipulation of dismissal with prejudice of the previous arbitration based on identical claims constituted a final adjudication on the merits, and thus res judicata applied to bar the instant arbitration.  The arbitrator further reasoned that any allegations that petitioner's counsel in the prior arbitration did not have the authority to permanently dismiss the proceeding on petitioner's behalf did not undermine the preclusive effect of that stipulation, noting that petitioner had commenced a legal malpractice action against its former counsel to pursue those claims.  Accordingly, the arbitrator's analysis demonstrates that the award had a colorable basis for its conclusion (see Matter of Mariana Trading, Inc. v Amazon.Com Servs., LLC, 231 A.D.3d 483, 484, 218 N.Y.S.3d 44 [1st Dept. 2024].

We have considered petitioner's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.