Tully Construction Company/A.J. Pegno Construction Company, J.V. v. Canam Steel Corporation
| Tully Construction Company/A.J. Pegno Construction Company, J.V. |
| Canam Steel Corporation |
| Canam Steel Corporation |
| Tully Construction Company/A.J. Pegno Construction Company, J.V. |
| 1:2013cv03037 |
| May 6, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Queens |
| Paul G. Gardephe |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 9 U.S.C. ยง 9 Motion to Confirm Arbitration Award |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
27
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: For the reasons stated above, this matter is remanded to Arbitrator Krol for the limited purpose of issuing a "reasoned award." Accordingly, Petitioner's motion to confirm the arbitration award (Dkt. No. 1) is denied. Respondent's cross-motion to vacate the award (Dkt. No. 7) on the grounds that Arbitrator Krol manifestly disregarded the law and committed misconduct is denied. Respondent's cross-motion is granted, however, to the extent that t he case is remanded to Arbitrator Krol so that he may provide a "reasoned award." The Clerk will terminate the motions (Dkt. Nos. 1, 7) and close this case. Either party may move to re-open this case within thirty days of Arbitrator Krol's issuance of a revised award. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Paul G. Gardephe on 3/02/2015) (ama)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
