Opinion
June 21, 2001.
Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Louis York, J.), entered January 17, 2001, confirming an arbitration award and awarding damages in favor of respondent and against petitioner, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Stuart Perlmutter, for petitioner-appellant.
Donald L. Kreindler Pro Se, for respondents-respondents.
Before: Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Rubin, Saxe, Buckley, JJ.
Petitioner seeks to vacate the unanimous award of a panel of three arbitrators based upon the failure of one of them to disclose, first, that some 15 to 20 years earlier his company was for a short time represented in an arbitration by a law firm in which respondent's attorney was a member, and, second, that several years before the instant arbitration, another company with which the arbitrator was associated approached that same firm and was referred elsewhere. Such relationships were too remote in time, short-lived and insubstantial to give rise to an appearance of partiality warranting vacatur of the award (cf., Matter of Cross Props. [Gimbel Bros.], 15 A.D.2d 913, affd 12 N.Y.2d 806; see generally, Matter of Wagner Stott Clearing Corp. [Celentano Sec. Corp.], 225 A.D.2d 367, lv denied 88 N.Y.2d 813, citing Matter of Weinrott [Carp], 32 N.Y.2d 190, 201). We are not persuaded otherwise by the size of the award (see, Matter of Torano [MVIAC], 19 A.D.2d 356, 358, affd 15 N.Y.2d 882).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.