From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Revis v. Schwartz

Court of Appeals of New York.
Mar 17, 2022
38 N.Y.3d 939 (N.Y. 2022)

Opinion

No. 13

03-17-2022

Darrelle REVIS et al., Appellants, v. Neil SCHWARTZ, et al., Respondents.

Williams & Connolly LLP, Washington, D.C. (Mark S. Levinstein, of the District of Columbia bar, admitted pro hac vice, and William I. Stewart, of the District of Columbia bar, admitted pro hac vice, of counsel), and Krovatin Nau LLC, Newark, New Jersey (Helen A. Nau of counsel), for appellants. Duane Morris LLP, New York City (Mario A. Aieta of counsel), for respondents.


Williams & Connolly LLP, Washington, D.C. (Mark S. Levinstein, of the District of Columbia bar, admitted pro hac vice, and William I. Stewart, of the District of Columbia bar, admitted pro hac vice, of counsel), and Krovatin Nau LLC, Newark, New Jersey (Helen A. Nau of counsel), for appellants.

Duane Morris LLP, New York City (Mario A. Aieta of counsel), for respondents.

OPINION OF THE COURT

MEMORANDUM. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs. Based on the allegations in the complaint, alleging intertwined claims of breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, and equitable

fraud and seeking rescission of all the parties’ agreements plus damages and disgorgement of fees arising therefrom, the Appellate Division properly concluded that the gateway questions of arbitrability should be resolved by the arbitrator (see Garthon Bus. Inc. v. Stein, 30 N.Y.3d 943, 944, 64 N.Y.S.3d 622, 86 N.E.3d 514 [2017] ; Life Receivables Trust v. Goshawk Syndicate 102 at Lloyd's, 14 N.Y.3d 850, 851, 901 N.Y.S.2d 133, 927 N.E.2d 553 [2010] ; Matter of Board of Educ. of Watertown City School Dist. [Watertown Educ. Assn.], 93 N.Y.2d 132, 143, 688 N.Y.S.2d 463, 710 N.E.2d 1064 [1999] ; see generally Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer & White Sales, Inc., 586 U.S. ––––, 139 S. Ct. 524, 202 L.Ed.2d 480 [2019] ).

Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Rivera, Garcia, Wilson, Singas, Cannataro and Troutman concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.


Summaries of

Revis v. Schwartz

Court of Appeals of New York.
Mar 17, 2022
38 N.Y.3d 939 (N.Y. 2022)
Case details for

Revis v. Schwartz

Case Details

Full title:Darrelle REVIS et al., Appellants, v. Neil SCHWARTZ, et al., Respondents.

Court:Court of Appeals of New York.

Date published: Mar 17, 2022

Citations

38 N.Y.3d 939 (N.Y. 2022)
165 N.Y.S.3d 14
185 N.E.3d 496

Citing Cases

Vitiello v. Home Buyers Resale Warranty Corp.

For similar reasons, we find that plaintiff's contention that defendants could not compel arbitration…

Vill. of Ossining v. Vill. of Ossining Policemans Benevolent Ass'n

ncluding any objections with respect to the existence, scope or validity of the arbitration agreement,' and…