Case Name: In the Matter of Mexvalo, S. De R.L. De C.V., Respondent, v. Desarrolladora Farallon S. De R.L. De C.V., Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2018-01-02
Citations: 157 A.D.3d 430
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of Mexvalo, S. De R.L. De C.V., Respondent, v Desarrolladora Farallon S. De R.L. De C.V., Appellant.
Judges: Concur—Richter, J.P., Tom, Kapnick, Kern and Moulton, JJ.
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 157
Pages: 430–431

Head Matter:
In the Matter of Mexvalo, S. De R.L. De C.V., Respondent, v Desarrolladora Farallon S. De R.L. De C.V., Appellant.
[66 NYS3d 123]

Opinion:
Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Charles E. Ramos, J.), entered February 23, 2017, inter alia, confirming an arbitration award, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
The record does not support respondent's contention that the arbitration award should be vacated on the ground of improper influence (see CPLR 7511 [b]; Matter of Sobel [Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.], 37 AD3d 877 [3d Dept 2007]). The documentary evidence shows that the neutral's potential retention by an af filiate of petitioner on an unrelated matter, which was fully disclosed, occurred after the arbitral tribunal reached a decision on the merits. The sufficiency of the evidence is for the arbitrators to determine (Matter of Peckerman v D & D Assoc., 165 AD2d 289, 296 [1st Dept 1991]). The tribunal rationally found, after lengthy cross-examination of the chief legal officer of petitioner's affiliate, that the legal costs that petitioner claimed as damages were credible, that petitioner was willing to provide redacted invoices for in camera inspection, and that, under the terms of the governing documents, petitioner was unconditionally responsible for indemnifying its affiliate for those costs and for recouping the funds from respondent.
Concur—Richter, J.P., Tom, Kapnick, Kern and Moulton, JJ.