Trustees Of The New York City District Council Of Carpenters Pension Fund v…
Trustees Of The New York City District Council Of Carpenters Pension Fund, Welfare Fund, Annuity Fund, and Apprenticeship, Journeyman Retraining, Educational and Industry Fund v. Talico Contracting Inc.
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:20-cv-03949
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Trustees v. Talico Contracting, Judge Abrams ordered more materials for an arbitration-confirmation petition but did not decide whether to confirm the award.
The petitioners and Talico Contracting Inc.; the order required the petitioners to submit additional materials and set deadlines for Talico’s possible opposition.
What happened
In Trustees of the New York City District Council of Carpenters Pension Fund, Welfare Fund, Annuity Fund, and Apprenticeship, Journeyman Retraining, Educational and Industry Fund v. Talico Contracting Inc., the petitioners asked the court to confirm an arbitration award. The opinion does not state the award’s terms.
The court said arbitration-confirmation proceedings are handled similarly to summary-judgment motions. It ordered the petitioners to provide additional supporting materials, including a certified arbitration award and sworn or certified copies of the underlying contracts.
Judge Ronnie Abrams set deadlines for the petitioners’ materials, Talico’s opposition, and the petitioners’ reply, and required proof that Talico received the order. The order did not decide whether to confirm the arbitration award.
The detailed version
- Trustees Of The New York City District Council Of Carpenters Pension Fund v… · No. 1:20-cv-03949
- Ronnie Abrams
- May 29, 2020
Background
The petitioners filed a complaint on May 21, 2020, seeking confirmation of an arbitration award. The opinion does not describe the dispute underlying the arbitration, the award’s amount or terms, or Talico Contracting Inc.’s position.
Court’s direction
The court stated that, in the Second Circuit, proceedings to confirm arbitration awards must be treated as similar to a motion for summary judgment. The court therefore ordered the petitioners to file and serve any additional materials supporting their petition by June 12, 2020. At a minimum, those materials had to include a certified copy of the arbitration award and sworn or certified copies of the underlying contracts.
Talico’s opposition, if any, was due June 26, 2020. The petitioners’ reply, if any, was due July 10, 2020. The petitioners also had to serve the order on Talico and file proof of service on the docket.
Disposition
Judge Ronnie Abrams issued an order setting deadlines and requiring supporting materials. The opinion does not state that the court confirmed or rejected the arbitration award, so it did not resolve the petition on the merits.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.