Decided December 4, 1996 The petition by Anthony N. Fraulo and CFC Greenwich Realty Corporation for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 37 Conn. App. 708 (AC 12961), is denied. David P. Burke, in support of the petition.
"As we have frequently stated, we cannot, and do not, retry the facts." Fraulo v. Gabelli, 37 Conn. App. 708, 718, 657 A.2d 704 (1995), cert. denied, 239 Conn. 947, 686 A.2d 125 (1996). The defendants' claim, therefore, fails.
Vail v. American Way Homes, Inc., 181 Conn. 449, 451, 435 A.2d 993 (1980)." Fraulo v. Gabelli, 37 Conn. App. 708, 714, 657 A.2d 704 (1995), cert. denied, 239 Conn. 947, 686 A.2d 125 (1996). "The process which governs the confirmation of arbitral awards is well settled by our cases. If the parties have agreed in the underlying contract that their disputes shall be resolved by arbitration, the arbitration clause in the contract is a written submission to arbitration.
" (Citations omitted.) Fraulo v. Gabelli, 37 Conn. App. 708, 716-17, 657 A.2d 704 (1995), cert. denied, 239 Conn. 947, 686 A.2d 125 (1996). Comparing the submission to the decision of the arbitrators, we conclude that the arbitrators' decision conforms to the broad unrestricted submission.
" (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Fraulo v. Gabelli, 37 Conn. App. 708, 716-17, 657 A.2d 704 (1995), cert. denied, 239 Conn. 947, 686 A.2d 125 (1996). Upon a comparison of the submission to the decision of the arbitrators, we conclude that the arbitrators' decision conforms to the broad unrestricted submission.
Id., 778. Additionally, at oral argument, the defendants cited Fraulo v. Gabelli, 37 Conn. App. 708, 714-715, 657 A.2d 704 (1995), cert. denied, 239 Conn. 947, 686 A.2d 125 (1996), for the proposition that the issue of arbitrability was a matter for the arbitrator to decide. The cases on which the defendants rely are distinguishable from the present case.
As noted, [i]n determining whether a submission is unrestricted, we look to the authority of the arbitrator. Fraulo v. Gabelli, 37 Conn. App. 708, 715, 657 A.2d 704 (1995). The authority of an arbitrator to adjudicate the controversy is limited only if the agreement contains express language restricting the breadth of issues, reserving explicit rights, or conditioning the award on court review.
As noted, "[i]n determining whether a submission is unrestricted, we look to the authority of the arbitrator." Fraulo v. Gabelli, 37 Conn. App. 708, 715, 657 A.2d 704 (1995). "The authority of an arbitrator to adjudicate the controversy is limited only if the agreement contains express language restricting the breadth of issues, reserving explicit rights, or conditioning the award on court review.
On February 2, 2009, however, the defendants properly filed with the arbitrator a motion to reconsider his decision awarding attorneys fees rendered on January 22, 2009. See, e.g., Fraulo v. Gabelli, 37 Conn.App. 708, 713, 657 A.2d 704 (1995), cert. denied, 239 Conn. 947, 686 A.2d 125 (1996). As a result, the court will not grant the plaintiff's motion on this ground.
Contract principles apply. Fraulo v. Gabetti, 37 Conn.App. 708 (1995); Holmes v. Holmes, 32 Conn.App. 317, 321 (1993). A joint venture exists where two or more parties combine property, money, efforts, skills and/or knowledge to seek a profit in some common undertaking without any actual partnership or corporate designation.