Opinion
February 13, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Beverly Cohen, J.).
The relevant issue to be pursued at the pre-arbitration hearing is the framed issue, which is whether "various of the petitioners may be bound by the arbitration agreement by reason of being the signatory's alter egos, successors and/or assigns", as to which "a hearing, and attendant disclosure, is needed in order to determine the relevant relationships and, ultimately, the proper parties to the arbitration" ( 193 A.D.2d 478). The IAS Court properly gave law of the case effect to our prior ruling in barring petitioners' efforts to explore additional issues ( cf., Wilson v. McCarthy, 53 A.D.2d 860). Denial of leave to amend was a proper exercise of the court's discretion ( see, Branch v. Abraham Strauss Dept. Store, 220 A.D.2d 474). We have considered petitioners' remaining arguments and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Rubin, Ross and Tom, JJ.