Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 16, 2019

District Council No. 9 International Union of Painters and Allied Trades v…

Full caption

District Council No. 9 International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, A.F.L.-C.I.O. v. Phoenix Interior Contracting Co., Inc.

Judge
Jesse Furman
Docket
1:19-cv-11358
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
ArbitrationCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In District Council No. 9 v. Phoenix Interior Contracting, Judge Furman set briefing and service deadlines for a petition to confirm an arbitration award.

Who this affects

The petitioner, District Council No. 9 International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, A.F.L.-C.I.O., and the respondent, Phoenix Interior Contracting Co., Inc., were affected by the filing, service, and briefing deadlines.

What happened

District Council No. 9 International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, A.F.L.-C.I.O. v. Phoenix Interior Contracting Co., Inc. involves the Union’s petition to confirm an arbitration award. The petition was filed on December 12, 2019.

The court ordered the Union to file any additional supporting materials by January 6, 2020. Phoenix Interior Contracting’s opposition, if any, was due January 20, 2020, and the Union’s reply, if any, was due February 3, 2020.

Judge Jesse M. Furman also required the Union to serve the petition, supporting papers, and order electronically and by overnight mail by January 6, 2020, and file proof of service by January 7, 2020. The order did not decide whether to confirm the arbitration award.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
District Council No. 9 International Union of Painters and Allied Trades v… · No. 1:19-cv-11358
Judge
Jesse Furman
Date
Dec. 16, 2019

Background

On December 12, 2019, 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 a motion for summary judgment, meaning the court considers the parties’ submitted materials under a procedure used to decide whether a case can be resolved without a trial.

Court’s Order

The court ordered the petitioner to file and serve any additional materials supporting the petition by January 6, 2020. The respondent’s opposition, if any, was due January 20, 2020, and the petitioner’s reply, if any, was due February 3, 2020.

The petitioner also had to serve the petition, all supporting papers, and the order on the respondent electronically and by overnight mail no later than January 6, 2020. The petitioner had to file an affidavit confirming service by January 7, 2020. The order set procedures and deadlines; it did not rule on whether the arbitration award should be confirmed.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.