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: COUNTY OF ORANGE, appellant, v. CIVIL SERVICE EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION, INC., LOCAL 1000 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES' UNION AFL-CIO, ORANGE COUNTY LOCAL 836, respondent.
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to vacate an arbitration award, the petitioner appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Peter C. Patsalos, J.), dated October 22, 1998, which denied the petition, and (2) a judgment of the same court, entered November 5, 1998, which, inter alia, denied the petition and confirmed the arbitrator's award.
ORDERED that the appeal from the order is dismissed; and it is further,
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed; and it is further,
ORDERED that the respondent is awarded one bill of costs.
The appeal from the intermediate order must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of judgment in this proceeding (see, Matter of Aho, 39 N.Y.2d 241, 248, 383 N.Y.S.2d 285, 347 N.E.2d 647). The issues raised on appeal from the order have been considered on the appeal from the judgment (see, CPLR 5501[a][1] ).
There is a rational basis for the ultimate determination of the arbitrator that article 23 of the contract between the appellant and the respondent was violated by the appellant's failure to appoint Anthony Uzzo, Jr., to the position of Building Maintenance Mechanic at the Orange County Residential Health Care Facility and that the remedy for that violation was to order his appointment to that position. Although the arbitrator may have misinterpreted a contract provision or provisions in making the award, that is not a basis for overturning an award where, as here, the determination was neither irrational, violative of a strong public policy, nor in excess of the arbitrator's authority (see, Matter of Silverman [Benmor Coats], 61 N.Y.2d 299, 473 N.Y.S.2d 774, 461 N.E.2d 1261; Maross Constr. v. Central N.Y. Regional Transp. Auth., 66 N.Y.2d 341, 497 N.Y.S.2d 321, 488 N.E.2d 67).
The appellant's remaining contentions are without merit or academic in light of our determination.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
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: November 01, 1999
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)