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.
Debra Rothberg, appellant, v. Jeffrey Marc Kaufman, et al., respondents, et al., defendants.
Argued—April 11, 2013
DECISION & ORDER
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Lefkowitz, J.), dated December 5, 2011, which granted the motion of the defendants Jeffrey Marc Kaufman and Jeffrey M. Kaufman Architects, LLC, pursuant to CPLR 7503(a) to compel arbitration and stay all proceedings in this action.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the Supreme Court properly granted the motion of the defendants Jeffrey Marc Kaufman and Jeffrey M. Kaufman Architects, LLC (hereinafter together the respondents), pursuant to CPLR 7503(a) to compel arbitration and stay all proceedings in this action. The subject agreement contained a broad arbitration clause expressly stating that “[a]ny claim, dispute or other matter in question arising out of or related to” the agreement, not resolved by mediation, “shall be subject to arbitration.” The agreement was “clear, explicit, and unequivocal and established a valid agreement to arbitrate” (Shah v. Monpat Constr., Inc., 65 AD3d 541, 544; see Matter of Smith Barney Shearson v Sacharow, 91 N.Y.2d 39, 49–50; Matter of Prinze [Jonas ], 38 N.Y.2d 570, 577; Matter of Weinrott [Carp ], 32 N.Y.2d 190, 198; Anderson St. Realty Corp. v New Rochelle Revitalization, LLC, 78 AD3d 972, 974–975).
We reject the plaintiff's contention that the agreement was void as against public policy because the respondents were not licenced in architecture at the time that they entered into the agreement with the plaintiff (see Charlebois v. Weller Assoc., 72 N.Y.2d 587, 591, 593–595; see also Matter of Jaidan Indus. v M.A. Angeliades, Inc., 97 N.Y.2d 659, 661).
The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.
RIVERA, J.P., BALKIN, DICKERSON and COHEN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Aprilanne Agostino
Clerk of 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.
Docket No: 2012–05318 (Index No. 54966 /11)
Decided: May 22, 2013
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)