Opinion
May 8, 2001.
Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Karla Moskowitz, J.), entered January 8, 2001, vacating so much of an arbitration award as awarded pre-award interest, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Daniel J. Brooks, for petitioner-respondent.
Thomas J. Schwarz, for respondents-appellants.
Before: Rosenberger, J.P., Nardelli, Tom, Andrias, Ellerin, JJ.
The arbitrators exceeded their authority in awarding pre-award interest on the back rent they found due, since the parties' narrow arbitration clause provided for arbitration of only specifically mentioned issues of fact, the mentioned issue underlying the instant arbitration being the value of the land for the purpose of fixing the rent, and the parties did not otherwise agree to submit the issue of interest to the arbitrators (see,Matter of Trump [Fefco Props.], 194 A.D.2d 70, 74, lv denied 83 N.Y.2d 754). Nor should such an award of interest be made as a matter of judicial discretion under CPLR 5001, where the arbitrators' valuation was closer to respondent-lessee's than to appellants-lessors' by a very considerable amount, and where much unnecessary litigation and delay can be attributed to appellants (see, Matter of Kern v. 303 E. 57th St. Corp., 204 A.D.2d 152, lv denied 84 N.Y.2d 810; Matter of Excelsior 57th Corp. [Kern], 218 A.D.2d 528).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.