The National Retirement Fund et al v. Metz Culinary Management, Inc
| The National Retirement Fund and The Board of Trustees of the National Retirement Fund |
| Metz Culinary Management, Inc |
| 1:2016cv02408 |
| March 31, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Westchester |
| Valerie E. Caproni |
| Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 1401 |
| 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
58
CLERK'S JUDGMENT re: 57 Order in favor of Metz Culinary Management, Inc. against The National Retirement Fund. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Order dated January 28, 2020, judgment is entered in favor of Defendant. Any remaining issues are remanded to arbitration. (Signed by Clerk of Court Ruby Krajick on 1/31/2020) (Attachments: # 1 Right to Appeal)(km) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
57
ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in favor of Defendant; 2. Any remaining issues are remanded to arbitration. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Valerie E. Caproni on 1/28/2020) (ama) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
49
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER re: 18 MOTION to Vacate Arbitration . filed by The National Retirement Fund, The Board of Trustees of the National Retirement Fund, 31 MOTION to Confirm Arbitration and Dismiss First Amended Com plaint. filed by Metz Culinary Management, Inc.: For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs motion to vacate the arbitration award is GRANTED, and Defendants motion to confirm the arbitration award is DENIED. The arbitration award is thus VACATED. The Court denies Metzs request to remand the case to arbitration because ERISA does not provide it with the authority to do so given that the Court has vacated an unambiguous award. See 29 U.S.C. § 1401(b); Hyle v. Doctors Assocs., Inc., 198 F.3 d 368, 370 (2d Cir. 1999) (holding that once arbitrators have finally decided the submitted issues, they are, in common-law parlance, functus officio, meaning that their authority over those questions is ended (citation omitted) and holding that a di strict court can remand an award to the arbitrator for clarification when an award is ambiguous). The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close docket entries 18 and 31 and to terminate the case. (Signed by Judge Valerie E. Caproni on 3/27/2017) (jwh)
|
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.
