Opinion
March 29, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Bruce McM. Wright, J.).
In an earlier appeal ( 161 A.D.2d 125, mod 162 A.D.2d 282, lv dismissed 76 N.Y.2d 1018), we remanded the matter for a new hearing on the limited issue of respondent's support obligations in respect to his mentally handicapped son. The arbitrator's holding was neither irrational nor violative of a strong public policy and, indeed, was amply supported by the evidence adduced at the arbitration (CPLR 7511 [b]; Siebert Co. v. Ponmany, 190 A.D.2d 544).
The 1987 Federal court's order of remand in this action to the Supreme Court of the State of New York ( 666 F. Supp. 626) ended the jurisdiction of the Federal court (United States v. Rice, 327 U.S. 742, 751-752; Hunt v. Acromed Corp., 961 F.2d 1079, 1081) and thus allowed the State court to entertain a request to modify or vacate a Federal "so ordered" stipulation between the parties dated June 3, 1987. Nevertheless, the IAS Court did not abuse its discretion in finding that petitioner had not yet engaged in dilatory conduct sufficient to justify directing petitioner, in effect, to vacate the cooperative apartment.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Carro, Rosenberger and Asch, JJ.