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.
IN RE: ALL METRO HEALTH CARE SERVICES, INC., et al., respondents, v. Glenn EDWARDS, appellant.
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to stay arbitration of certain claims pursuant to a stock purchase agreement, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (LaMarca, J.), entered February 22, 2008, which granted the petition.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
“Arbitration is essentially a creature of contract in which the parties themselves charter a private tribunal for the resolution of their disputes and are free to enlarge, restrict, modify, amend or terminate their agreement to arbitrate” (Matter of Instituto De Resseguros Do Brasil v. First State Ins. Co., 221 A.D.2d 266, 266, 634 N.Y.S.2d 79; see Matter of Schlaifer v. Sedlow, 51 N.Y.2d 181, 185, 433 N.Y.S.2d 67, 412 N.E.2d 1294). In general, where, as here, there is a broad arbitration clause, “all questions with respect to the validity and effect of subsequent documents purporting to work a modification or termination of the substantive provisions of their original agreement are to be resolved by the arbitrator” (Inryco, Inc. v. Parsons & Whittemore Contrs. Corp., 55 N.Y.2d 666, 667, 446 N.Y.S.2d 930, 431 N.E.2d 291). However, the parties herein entered into a subsequent agreement containing a provision that effectively imposed a condition precedent on the arbitration clause in the arbitration provision, satisfaction of which is required before the appellant could “commence any action or proceeding [,]” including the arbitration proceeding at issue, against, inter alia, the petitioners herein. Notwithstanding a broad arbitration clause, the threshold determination of whether a condition precedent to arbitration exists and whether it has been complied with, is for the court to determine (see Matter of Cassone, 63 N.Y.2d 756, 759, 480 N.Y.S.2d 317, 469 N.E.2d 835; Matter of County of Rockland [Primiano Constr. Co.], 51 N.Y.2d 1, 7, 431 N.Y.S.2d 478, 409 N.E.2d 951; Matter of Fasano v. Fasano, 134 A.D.2d 589, 521 N.Y.S.2d 491). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the petition to stay arbitration.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: December 23, 2008
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)