Drywall Tapers and Painters of Greater New York Local Union 1974 v. Seamless…
Drywall Tapers and Painters of Greater New York Local Union 1974, Affiliated with International Union of Allied Painters and Allied Trades, AFL-CIO v. Seamless Wall Finishing Inc.
- Vargas
- 1:25-cv-08081
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Drywall Tapers v. Seamless Wall Finishing, Judge Vargas set briefing and service deadlines for a petition to confirm an arbitration award.
The petitioner, Drywall Tapers and Painters of Greater New York Local Union 1974, and the respondent, Seamless Wall Finishing Inc., were affected by the filing, briefing, and service deadlines.
What happened
Drywall Tapers and Painters of Greater New York Local Union 1974 v. Seamless Wall Finishing Inc. concerns the union’s petition to confirm an arbitration award. The union filed the petition on September 30, 2025.
The court treated the confirmation proceeding like a request for summary judgment and ordered the union to submit any additional supporting materials. It also set deadlines for Seamless Wall Finishing’s opposition, the union’s reply, and service of the petition and supporting papers.
Judge Jeannette A. Vargas did not decide whether to confirm the arbitration award. She entered an order setting the filing and service deadlines.
The detailed version
- Drywall Tapers and Painters of Greater New York Local Union 1974 v. Seamless… · No. 1:25-cv-08081
- Vargas
- Nov. 12, 2025
Background
On September 30, 2025, the petitioner filed a petition asking the court to confirm an arbitration award. The opinion states that proceedings to confirm an arbitration award are treated like motions for summary judgment, meaning the court considers the parties’ submitted materials to determine whether judgment should be entered.
Order
Judge Jeannette A. Vargas ordered the petitioner to file and serve any additional materials supporting the petition by December 1, 2025. The respondent’s opposition, if any, was due December 22, 2025, and the petitioner’s reply, if any, was due December 29, 2025.
The petitioner also had to serve the petition, all supporting papers, and the order on the respondent under Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by December 1, 2025. The petitioner had to file proof of that service with the court by December 2, 2025.
What the Order Did Not Decide
The order set deadlines and service requirements. It did not decide whether the arbitration award should be confirmed.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.