Case Name: In the Matter of the Arbitration between Bill of Fare, Inc., Appellant, and Adam King, Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1993-03-23
Citations: 191 A.D.2d 344
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of the Arbitration between Bill of Fare, Inc., Appellant, and Adam King, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 191
Pages: 344–344

Head Matter:
In the Matter of the Arbitration between Bill of Fare, Inc., Appellant, and Adam King, Respondent.
[596 NYS2d 2]

Opinion:
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Tompkins, J.), entered March 2, 1992, which denied petitioner's application for a stay of arbitration, and dismissed the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The arbitration clause, which provides for arbitration of "any disputes as to monies due under this agreement," clearly encompasses a claim for commissions earned prior to petitioner's termination of the agreement. But the clause also encompasses the claim for commissions that respondent says he would have earned had petitioner not wrongfully terminated the contract, and which would necessarily require the arbitrator to decide whether petitioner breached the agreement. Respondent's right to such prospective damages is a matter of contract interpretation to be left to the arbitrator under a broad arbitration clause (Pearl St. Dev. Corp. v Conduit & Found. Corp., 41 NY2d 167, 171). Concur — Murphy, P. J., Carro, Rosenberger, Ross and Kassal, JJ.