Opinion
January 21, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Durante, J.).
Ordered that the order dated October 25, 1989, is reversed, on the law, the motion to vacate the arbitration award is granted, and the parties are directed to proceed with a new arbitration hearing to be conducted by different arbitrators (see, CPLR 7511 [d]); and it is further,
Ordered that the order dated February 28, 1990, is modified, on the law and as a matter of discretion, (1) by deleting the provision thereof confirming the arbitration award, and (2) by reducing the amount of the neutral arbitrator's fee from $4,500 to $2,250; as so modified, the order dated February 28, 1990, is affirmed; and it is further,
Ordered that the appellant is awarded one bill of costs, payable by the petitioner.
The arbitrators failed to follow the procedures set forth in CPLR article 75 (see, CPLR 7506, 7511 [b] [1] [iv]; Matter of Goldfinger v. Lisker, 68 N.Y.2d 225, 231), in that the appellant was not furnished written notice of the arbitration hearing, and the arbitration hearing was not conducted by all of the arbitrators. These violations, taken together, establish that the arbitration process was sufficiently unfair to warrant vacatur of the arbitration award (see, Matter of Gutman v. Friedman, 170 A.D.2d 606). Accordingly, we direct a new arbitration hearing before different arbitrators (see, CPLR 7511 [d]; Matter of Lawrence Terrace Co. v. Benova, 133 A.D.2d 689).
Further, the court improvidently exercised its discretion in awarding the neutral arbitrator a fee of $4,500 (see, CPLR 7513). Under the circumstances of this case, the fee awarded was excessive, and is reduced to $2,250. Harwood, J.P., Balletta, Rosenblatt and Copertino, JJ., concur.