Case ID: ad2d_46/html/0863-04.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Abraham Gelbfish et al., Respondents, v. Abraham C. Grossman et al., Defendants, and Bruckner Land Corp., Appellant.
   Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County, entered on or about August 26, 1974, which, to the extent appealed from, denied a stay of the action pending arbitration between plaintiffs and defendant Abraham Grossman, unanimously reversed, on the law and in the exercise of discretion, the motion for a stay granted, and the action stayed pending completion of the arbitration proceeding between plaintiffs and defendant, Abraham C. Grossman. Appellant shall recover of respondents $40 costs and disbursements of this appeal. Plaintiffs claim a 50% interest in a parcel of real property and the nursing home facility located thereon by virtue of a partnership agreement with defendant Abraham Grossman and have instituted this action for conveyance of such interest and related relief. By order, entered July 26, 1974, the action was stayed as to defendant Grossman pursuant to a provision for rabbinical arbitration included in the agreement, dated March 9, 1970, between plaintiffs and defendant Grossman, and the parties to the agreement were directed to proceed to arbitration. Even though the other defendants are not bound by the provision for arbitration, the underpinning of plaintiffs’ claims is subject to resolution by arbitration. Indeed, the determination by the arbitrators may be dispositive of the principal portion, if not all, of plaintiffs’ alleged rights. A stay of the action appears singularly appropriate under the circumstances. (See Mid-Atlantic Gonstr. Corp. v. Guido, 30 A D 2d 232, 238; Eager, Arbitration Contract & Proceedings [1971], § 82, pp. 233-235.) Concur — McGivern, P. J., Markewich, Nunez and Maeken, JJ.