IN RE: TUCKER ANTHONY (1999)

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

IN RE: TUCKER ANTHONY, INC., et al., appellants, v. BLUNT, ELLIS & LOEW, INC., et al., respondents.

Decided: April 05, 1999

LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, J.P., THOMAS R. SULLIVAN, MYRIAM J. ALTMAN and WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, JJ.

Joseph D'Elia, Huntington, N.Y. (Paul L. Meli and Justice Sacca of counsel), for appellants. Ruskin, Moscou, Evans & Faltischek, P.C., Mineola, N.Y. (Jeffrey M. Schlossberg of counsel) and Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren, Ltd., Bloomington, Mn., for respondent LaRoy A. Luther (one brief filed).

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to permanently stay arbitration, the petitioners appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Phelan, J.), entered January 2, 1998, which denied the petition.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We agree that the petitioners participated in the arbitration process thereby manifesting a preference clearly inconsistent with their present effort to stay arbitration (cf., DeSapio v. Kohlmeyer, 35 N.Y.2d 402, 405, 362 N.Y.S.2d 843, 321 N.E.2d 770).

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

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Out of date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