Opinion
10553, 10554, 10554A Index 653961/16
12-12-2019
In re CAPITAL ENTERPRISES CO., Petitioner–Appellant, v. Alvin DWORMAN, Respondent–Respondent.
Morrison Cohen LLP, New York (Y. David Scharf of counsel), for appellant. Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky & Popeo P.C., New York (Christopher J. Sullivan of counsel), for respondent.
Morrison Cohen LLP, New York (Y. David Scharf of counsel), for appellant.
Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky & Popeo P.C., New York (Christopher J. Sullivan of counsel), for respondent.
Renwick, J.P., Gische, Mazzarelli, Moulton, JJ.
Orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Jennifer G. Schecter, J.), entered May 14, 2019, May 17, 2019, and July 19, 2019, which denied petitioner's motions to vacate certain orders issued by an arbitrator, unanimously reversed, on the law, with costs, and the orders vacated.
The arbitrator's orders were issued in connection with the sale process that followed the issuance of a partial final arbitral award (see Matter of Capital Enters. Co. v. Dworman , 173 A.D.3d 466, 104 N.Y.S.3d 48 [1st Dept. 2019] ). However, the orders are interlocutory and therefore not subject to judicial review (see Mobil Oil Indonesia v. Asamera Oil [Indonesia] , 43 N.Y.2d 276, 281, 401 N.Y.S.2d 186, 372 N.E.2d 21 [1977] ["before the court may ... even entertain a suit seeking court intervention, there must be an ‘award’ within the meaning of the statute"]; CPLR article 75). After the sale process has been concluded, when the properties have been sold and a final accounting rendered, petitioner may seek to vacate the final award (see Avon Prods. v. Solow , 150 A.D.2d 236, 238–239, 541 N.Y.S.2d 406 [1st Dept. 1989] ).