From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rubin Films LLC v. Kaul

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Aug 13, 2019
175 A.D.3d 419 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)

Opinion

9280 9281 Index 651878/15

08-13-2019

In re RUBIN FILMS LLC, Petitioner–Respondent, v. Amitav KAUL, et al., Respondents–Appellants.

The Stolper Group, LLP, New York (Michael Stolper of counsel), for appellants. Wachs & Associates, Larchmont (Stuart Wachs of counsel), for respondent.


The Stolper Group, LLP, New York (Michael Stolper of counsel), for appellants.

Wachs & Associates, Larchmont (Stuart Wachs of counsel), for respondent.

Friedman, J.P., Renwick, Kapnick, Kahn, Oing, JJ.

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Erika M. Edwards, J.), entered on or about January 5, 2018, which granted petitioner's motion fixing legal fees as costs against respondents' attorney Michael Stolper, Esq., deemed an appeal from the judgment, same court and Justice, entered April 3, 2018 ( CPLR 5520 ), in the amount of $10,653.68 against Stolper, and, as so considered, said judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. Order, same court and Justice, entered on or about January 5, 2018, which granted petitioner's motion to punish respondents for civil contempt and denied respondents' motion to vacate or confirm a June 29, 2015 arbitration award, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

There is no basis to disturb the sanctions awarded against Stolper for frivolous motion practice (see 22 NYCRR 130–1.1 [a] ). Nor did respondents provide a basis for either vacating or confirming the arbitrator's award (see CPLR 7511 ; Matter of Isernio v. Blue Star Jets, LLC, 140 A.D.3d 480, 31 N.Y.S.3d 884 [1st Dept. 2016] ). Respondents' arguments designed to collaterally attack the underlying injunction order will not be entertained (see Board of Directors of Windsor Owners Corp. v. Platt, 148 A.D.3d 645, 49 N.Y.S.3d 293 [1st Dept. 2017], lv dismissed 30 N.Y.3d 986, 66 N.Y.S.3d 213, 88 N.E.3d 371 [2017] ).

We have considered respondents' remaining contentions and find them unavailing.


Summaries of

Rubin Films LLC v. Kaul

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Aug 13, 2019
175 A.D.3d 419 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
Case details for

Rubin Films LLC v. Kaul

Case Details

Full title:In re Rubin Films LLC, Petitioner-Respondent, v. Amitav Kaul, et al.…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Aug 13, 2019

Citations

175 A.D.3d 419 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 6141
104 N.Y.S.3d 541

Citing Cases

Town of Southold v. Kelly

Significantly, here, defendants do not assert their inability to comply with the Court's March 21, 2018…

Country-Wide Ins. Co. v. SMK Pharmacy Corp.

DISCUSSION An arbitration award may only be vacated where an arbitrator exceeded his or her power, or where…