SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1191 

CA 15-00147 

PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, VALENTINO, AND WHALEN, JJ. 

 

IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRATION BETWEEN CIVIL 

SERVICE EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, INC., LOCAL 

1000, AFSCME, A.F.L.-C.I.O. ONONDAGA LOCAL 

834, SYRACUSE CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT UNIT 6, 

AND PETER RYAN, PETITIONERS-RESPONDENTS, 

 

AND MEMORANDUM AND ORDER 

BOARD OF EDUCATION OF SYRACUSE CITY SCHOOL 

DISTRICT, HONORABLE PATRICIA BODY, PRESIDENT, 

AND SHARON L. CONTRERAS, SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS,

RESPONDENTS-APPELLANTS. 

FERRARA, FIORENZA, LARRISON, BARRETT & REITZ, P.C., EAST SYRACUSE

(CRAIG M. ATLAS OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENTS-APPELLANTS.

D. JEFFREY GOSCH, SYRACUSE, FOR PETITIONERS-RESPONDENTS.

 

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County (James

P. Murphy, J.), entered May 7, 2014 in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR

article 75. The order, inter alia, granted the application to confirm

an arbitration award. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is

unanimously modified on the law by vacating the award of attorneys’

fees and as modified the order is affirmed without costs. 

Memorandum: Respondents in this CPLR article 75 proceeding

appeal from an order granting the application of petitioners to

confirm an arbitration award in their favor, denying respondents’

cross motion to vacate the award, and directing respondents to pay

petitioners’ attorneys’ fees. The arbitrator determined following a

hearing that respondents had violated the parties’ collective

bargaining agreement by terminating the employment of Peter Ryan

(petitioner) in July 2011 and, as a remedy, the arbitrator directed

respondents to reinstate petitioner to his prior position, credit him

with the seniority to which he would have been entitled had his

employment not been wrongly terminated, and pay him “back pay for the

salary and other benefits [he] lost as a result of [his] improper

termination,” retroactive to 30 days before he filed his grievance.

Respondents contend that the award is not final and definite, and

thus subject to vacatur under CPLR 7511 (b) (1) (iii), because the

arbitrator did not specify whether respondents are entitled to an
-2- 1191 

CA 15-00147 

offset based on funds petitioner received following his termination

from unemployment insurance and other employment. We reject that

contention. An arbitration award is nonfinal or indefinite “only if

it leaves the parties unable to determine their rights and

obligations, if it does not resolve the controversy submitted or if it

creates a new controversy” (Matter of Meisels v Uhr, 79 NY2d 526, 536;

see Yoonessi v Givens, 78 AD3d 1622, 1622-1623, lv denied 17 NY3d

718). Here, the award sufficiently defined the parties’ rights and

obligations notwithstanding its failure to address the offset issue

(see Matter of Civil Serv. Empls. Assn., Local 1000, AFSCME, AFL-CIO

[State of New York], 223 AD2d 890, 891-892). We note that there is no

indication in the record that respondents asked the arbitrator for an

offset at the hearing, and that, although the arbitrator retained

jurisdiction “with respect to the remedy until April 1, 2013,” which

was approximately six weeks after the award was rendered, respondents

did not seek clarification of the award before that date. 

We conclude, however, that Supreme Court erred in awarding

attorneys’ fees to petitioners as a sanction for frivolous conduct

without issuing a written decision setting forth the conduct on which

the award is based and the reasons why the court found that conduct to

be frivolous, as required by 22 NYCRR 130-1.2 (see Matter of

Bedworth-Holgado v Holgado, 85 AD3d 1589, 1590; Matter of Gigliotti v

Bianco, 82 AD3d 1636, 1638). We therefore modify the order by

vacating the award of attorneys’ fees. 

Entered: November 20, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court