Case Name: In the Matter of the Arbitration between Alan A. Schachter et al., Appellants, and Lester Witte & Company, Respondent
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1977-05-03
Citations: 41 N.Y. 1067
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of the Arbitration between Alan A. Schachter et al., Appellants, and Lester Witte & Company, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 41
Pages: 1067–1068

Head Matter:
In the Matter of the Arbitration between Alan A. Schachter et al., Appellants, and Lester Witte & Company, Respondent.
Argued March 29, 1977;
decided May 3, 1977
Stephen P. H. Rachlis, Harold Manheim, Robert Braunschweig and Franz S. Leichter for appellants.
Arnold Buffum Lovell, Arnold Chase, Edward Matthew Kabak and Richard H. Altabef for respondent.

Opinion:
Memorandum. Order affirmed.
The conclusory allegations contained in the petition and moving papers are insufficient to demonstrate that there is a "substantial question of the existence of a 'valid agreement' to arbitrate" (Durst v Abrash, 22 AD2d 39, 41, affd on opn below 17 NY2d 445). Specifically, petitioners do not spell out evidentiary facts sufficient to raise a triable issue in support of their claim that they were induced to enter into the partnership agreement or to agree to the arbitration clause contained within it as a result of fraud or duress (8 Weinstein-KornMiller, NY Civ Prac, par 7503.23, p 75-83; see Moseley v Electronic Facilities, 374 US 167; Matter of Housekeeper v Lourie, 39 AD2d 280, app dsmd 32 NY2d 832). Nor does the agreement, on its face, constitute an unlawful restraint of trade (Matter of Riccardi [Modern Silver Linen Supply Co.], 36 NY2d 945, 947). Hence, the application to stay arbitration was properly denied.
Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur.
Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.