From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Arbitration, Bd., Trustees, Cayuga

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 2, 2001
283 A.D.2d 993 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

Filed May 2, 2001.

Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Cayuga County, Contiguglia, J. — Arbitration.

PRESENT: PIGOTT, JR., P.J., WISNER, SCUDDER, KEHOE AND BURNS, JJ.


Order unanimously affirmed with costs.

Memorandum:

Petitioners, the Board of Trustees of Cayuga County Community College and its president, appeal from an order dismissing their CPLR article 75 petition seeking a permanent stay of arbitration of a grievance pursued by respondents, the Cayuga County Community College Faculty Association and its president. Petitioners contend that public policy prohibits the parties from arbitrating the instant dispute; that no valid agreement to arbitrate was made; that respondents' demand for arbitration lacks specificity; and that the demand for arbitration was improperly served.

The subject matter of the grievance is not a prohibited subject of collective bargaining, and thus public policy does not bar arbitration of this matter ( see, Matter of Barnes [Council 82, AFSCME], 94 N.Y.2d 719, 723; Matter of Board of Educ. [Watertown Educ. Assn.], 93 N.Y.2d 132, 138-140). Moreover, the subject matter of the grievance is encompassed within the broad arbitration provision set forth in the collective bargaining agreement ( see, Matter of Board of Educ. [Watertown Educ. Assn.], supra, at 140-142).

Contrary to petitioners' further contention, the nature of the dispute or grievance sought to be arbitrated is sufficiently specified in the notice of intent to arbitrate and the demand for arbitration ( see, Matter of Cleveland [Sergio], 184 A.D.2d 897, 899; Matter of National Fuel Gas Distrib. Corp. v. Paragon Resources, 63 A.D.2d 826, rearg denied 63 A.D.2d 826).

With regard to petitioners' remaining contention, we conclude that respondents served their notice of intention to arbitrate in precisely the manner provided for in the collective bargaining agreement. The parties were free to fashion their own service requirements in their arbitration agreement ( see, Matter of Severin [County of Broome], 89 A.D.2d 689, lv denied 58 N.Y.2d 605 ; see, e.g., Park Terrace Gardens v. Bevona, 161 A.D.2d 510, 511-512, lv denied 77 N.Y.2d 802; Matter of McGreevy [Civil Servs. Empls. Assn.], 150 A.D.2d 891, 892).


Summaries of

Matter of Arbitration, Bd., Trustees, Cayuga

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 2, 2001
283 A.D.2d 993 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Matter of Arbitration, Bd., Trustees, Cayuga

Case Details

Full title:MATTER OF THE ARBITRATION BETWEEN BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF CAYUGA COUNTY…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: May 2, 2001

Citations

283 A.D.2d 993 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
723 N.Y.S.2d 738