From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chef Chloe, LLC v. Wasser

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Jan 29, 2019
168 A.D.3d 610 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)

Opinion

8243 Index 653041/16

01-29-2019

CHEF CHLOE, LLC, etc., Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Samantha WASSER, et al., Defendants, ESquared Hospitality LLC, Defendant–Respondent, CCSW LLC, Nominal Defendant. ESquared Hospitality LLC, etc., Counterclaim and Third–Party Plaintiff–Respondent, v. Chef Chloe, LLC, Counterclaim Defendant–Appellant, Chloe Coscarelli, Third–Party Defendant–Appellant.

Robins Kaplan LLP, New York (Ronald J. Schutz of counsel), for appellants. Pryor Cashman LLP, New York (Philip R. Hoffman of counsel), for respondent.


Robins Kaplan LLP, New York (Ronald J. Schutz of counsel), for appellants.

Pryor Cashman LLP, New York (Philip R. Hoffman of counsel), for respondent.

Renwick, J.P., Richter, Mazzarelli, Webber, Kern, JJ.

Plaintiff seeks vacatur or modification of the arbitration award on the sole ground that the arbitrator exceeded her authority by granting relief that was not specifically demanded in defendant's statement of claim (see CPLR 7511[b], [c] ; Frankel v. Sardis, 76 A.D.3d 136, 139, 904 N.Y.S.2d 18 [1st Dept. 2010] ). The arbitrator found that plaintiff could be terminated as Service Member from nominal defendant CCSW LLC "for cause," as that term was defined in the parties' operating agreement. The record demonstrates that the parties submitted evidence, including testimony, and advanced arguments concerning the issue of for-cause termination and that defendant described the conduct by plaintiff that supported for-cause termination in detailed allegations in the statement of claim and in the answer with counterclaims that it had filed in this action, which was annexed to the statement of claim. In the operating agreement, the parties had agreed that all disputes concerning the terms of the agreement would be submitted to arbitration and that they would be bound by the arbitrator's award. "The language of arbitration demands is not subject to the strict standards of construction applicable to formal court pleadings" ( id. at 140, 904 N.Y.S.2d 18 ). To hold that the arbitrator was acting outside the scope of her authority when she determined that plaintiff had been terminated for cause "would unnecessarily elevate form over substance and preclude an otherwise meritorious arbitration award merely because" the statement of claim did not specifically demand that relief ( id. at 141, 904 N.Y.S.2d 18 ).

We have considered plaintiff's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.


Summaries of

Chef Chloe, LLC v. Wasser

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Jan 29, 2019
168 A.D.3d 610 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
Case details for

Chef Chloe, LLC v. Wasser

Case Details

Full title:CHEF CHLOE, LLC, etc., Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Samantha WASSER, et al.…

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

Date published: Jan 29, 2019

Citations

168 A.D.3d 610 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
93 N.Y.S.3d 15

Citing Cases

Coscarelli v. Esquared Hosp.

The New York Supreme Court confirmed the Garay Arbitration Award on November 16, 2017, in a decision that was…

Diamond v. Diamond

Petitioner was necessarily aware from the inception of the arbitration proceedings of Scott's claim that…