United Scenic Artists, Local USA 829, IATSE v. Parnes
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:25-cv-00143
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In United Scenic Artists v. Parnes, Judge Engelmayer set briefing deadlines on a request to confirm an arbitration award.
United Scenic Artists, Local USA 829, IATSE and the respondents to its petition to confirm the October 21, 2024 arbitration award are affected by the briefing and service deadlines.
What happened
United Scenic Artists, Local USA 829, IATSE asked the court to confirm an arbitration award issued on October 21, 2024, in United Scenic Artists, Local USA 829, IATSE v. Parnes.
The court did not decide whether to confirm the award. It treated the request like a summary-judgment motion and set deadlines for the parties’ written arguments.
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer ordered the petitioner’s supporting brief by February 4, 2025, the respondents’ opposition by February 25, and any reply by March 11. He also ordered the petitioner to serve the respondents and file proof of service by January 21.
The detailed version
- United Scenic Artists, Local USA 829, IATSE v. Parnes · No. 1:25-cv-00143
- Paul Engelmayer
- Jan. 14, 2025
Background
United Scenic Artists, Local USA 829, IATSE moved to confirm an arbitration award dated October 21, 2024. The opinion does not describe the underlying dispute or the award’s terms.
Court’s Procedure
The court stated that proceedings to confirm an arbitration award are treated like a motion for summary judgment. It therefore set a schedule for written submissions rather than deciding the confirmation request at this stage.
The petitioner’s memorandum supporting the petition is due February 4, 2025. The respondents’ opposition is due February 25, 2025. The petitioner’s reply, if any, is due March 11, 2025.
Service and Ruling
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer ordered the petitioner to promptly serve the order, the petition, and supporting papers on the respondents. The petitioner must file proof of that service on the docket by January 21, 2025. The order sets the briefing schedule and service requirement; it does not grant or deny confirmation of the arbitration award.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.