Opinion
546 CA 17–02122
04-27-2018
In the MATTER OF ARBITRATION BETWEEN TOWN OF TONAWANDA, Petitioner–Respondent, and Town of Tonawanda Salaried Orkers Association, L. Edward Allen, President, Town of Tonawanda Salaried Workers Association, and Mark Kocher, Treasurer, Town of Tonawanda Salaried Workers Association, Respondents–Appellants.
BARTLO, HETTLER, WEISS & TRIPI, KENMORE (PAUL D. WEISS OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENTS–APPELLANTS. GOLDBERG SEGALLA, BUFFALO (SEAN P. BEITER OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER–RESPONDENT.
BARTLO, HETTLER, WEISS & TRIPI, KENMORE (PAUL D. WEISS OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENTS–APPELLANTS.
GOLDBERG SEGALLA, BUFFALO (SEAN P. BEITER OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER–RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CARNI, DEJOSEPH, NEMOYER, AND TROUTMAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Memorandum:
Petitioner commenced this proceeding to vacate or modify an arbitration award, and respondents filed an "answer and cross motion" to confirm the award. We agree with respondents that Supreme Court erred in granting the petition and vacating the award. The award does not violate a strong public policy, is not irrational, and does not " ‘clearly exceed[ ] a specifically enumerated limitation on the arbitrator's power’ " ( Matter of United Fedn. of Teachers, Local 2, AFT, AFL–CIO v. Board of Educ. of City Sch. Dist. of City of N.Y., 1 N.Y.3d 72, 79, 769 N.Y.S.2d 451, 801 N.E.2d 827 [2003] ; see Matter of Lucas [City of Buffalo], 93 A.D.3d 1160, 1163–1164, 941 N.Y.S.2d 365 [4th Dept. 2012] ). We note in particular that the award is not irrational inasmuch as the arbitrator offered at least "a barely colorable justification for the outcome reached" ( Matter of Monroe County Sheriff's Off. [Monroe County Deputy Sheriffs' Assn., Inc.], 79 A.D.3d 1797, 1799, 915 N.Y.S.2d 425 [4th Dept. 2010] [internal quotation marks omitted] ). Contrary to petitioner's alternative contention, the award cannot be modified "without affecting the merits of the decision upon the issues submitted" ( CPLR 7511 [c][2] ), and thus we see no basis for such modification. We therefore reverse the order, deny the petition, grant the cross motion, and confirm the award.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the petition is denied, the cross motion is granted, and the award is confirmed.