From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Tumminello v. Oak Hollow Associates

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 1, 1990
166 A.D.2d 450 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

October 1, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Orange County (Owen, J.).


Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the amended judgment dated June 16, 1988, is vacated; and it is further,

Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The arbitration award was properly confirmed (see, Lentine v Fundaro, 29 N.Y.2d 382; see also, Matter of Marfrak Realty Corp. v. Samfred Realty Corp., 140 A.D.2d 524, 525). All of the submissions made by the petitioner in the arbitration are covered in the award, and there is no lack of finality or definiteness (cf., Matter of PPX Enters. [Scepter Records], 51 A.D.2d 321).

The respondents-appellants' motion to resettle was in effect a motion to vacate the amended judgment. As such, the order denying that motion is appealable (cf., Blume v. Blume, 124 A.D.2d 771; Brennan v. Breezy Point Coop., 124 A.D.2d 772). The court, in its amended judgment, misinterpreted the arbitrators' award, and, therefore, the amended judgment should have been vacated. Bracken, J.P., Brown, Kunzeman and Sullivan, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Tumminello v. Oak Hollow Associates

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 1, 1990
166 A.D.2d 450 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

Matter of Tumminello v. Oak Hollow Associates

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of DORA TUMMINELLO, Appellant-Respondent, v. OAK HOLLOW…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Oct 1, 1990

Citations

166 A.D.2d 450 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
560 N.Y.S.2d 498