Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. v. Winston
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:24-cv-10033
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Charles Schwab & Co. v. Winston, Judge Engelmayer set briefing deadlines on a petition to confirm an arbitration award.
Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. must submit its supporting brief and serve the required papers; Edward Brian Winston must respond by the deadline if he opposes the petition.
What happened
Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. asked the court to confirm a February 20, 2024 arbitration award involving Edward Brian Winston.
The court set deadlines for the petitioner's supporting brief, the respondent's opposition, and any reply. The petitioner must also promptly serve the order and supporting papers on the respondent and file proof of service by January 30, 2025.
Judge Engelmayer issued a scheduling order and did not decide whether to confirm the arbitration award. The supporting brief is due February 13, 2025, the opposition is due March 6, 2025, and any reply is due March 13, 2025.
The detailed version
- Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. v. Winston · No. 1:24-cv-10033
- Paul Engelmayer
- Jan. 23, 2025
Background
Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. petitioned the court to confirm a February 20, 2024 arbitral award. The opinion states that proceedings to confirm an arbitral award are treated similarly to a motion for summary judgment, but the court did not decide the petition's merits in this order.
Briefing Schedule
The court set the following deadlines:
- Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.'s memorandum supporting its petition is due February 13, 2025. - Edward Brian Winston's opposition is due March 6, 2025. - Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.'s reply, if any, is due March 13, 2025.
The petitioner must promptly serve the order, the petition, and its supporting papers on Winston. It must file proof of service on the case docket no later than January 30, 2025.
Disposition
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer issued an order setting the briefing schedule and service requirement. The order does not state whether the court granted or denied the petition to confirm the arbitration award.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.