Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 3, 2021

Drywall Tapers and Pointers of Greater New York Local Union 1974 v. Jimenez

Full caption

Drywall Tapers and Pointers of Greater New York Local Union 1974, Affiliated with International Union of Allied Painters and Allied Trades, AFL-CIO v. Efrain Jimenez, Jr. General Contractor Inc.

Judge
Lorna Schofield
Docket
1:21-cv-05616
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
ArbitrationCivil ProcedureSummary Judgment
In one sentence

Drywall Tapers v. Efrain Jimenez, Judge Schofield treated the unanswered arbitration petition as an unopposed summary-judgment motion.

Who this affects

The petitioner and the respondent in the arbitration-award confirmation proceeding. The respondent had not appeared, and the court directed that the petition proceed as an unopposed summary-judgment motion based on the existing papers.

What happened

Drywall Tapers and Pointers of Greater New York Local Union 1974 brought a petition against Efrain Jimenez, Jr. General Contractor, Inc., seeking confirmation of an arbitration award.

The respondent was served on July 1, 2021, but did not appear or respond by the July 22 deadline. The court explained that unanswered petitions to confirm or overturn arbitration awards generally should not lead directly to a default judgment.

Judge Lorna G. Schofield ordered that the petition be treated as an unopposed motion for summary judgment. The motion was considered fully presented based on the papers already filed, and the court said it would decide it on those papers; the order did not decide whether to confirm the award.

The detailed version

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

Case
Drywall Tapers and Pointers of Greater New York Local Union 1974 v. Jimenez · No. 1:21-cv-05616
Judge
Lorna Schofield
Date
Aug. 3, 2021

Background

The petitioner filed a petition seeking confirmation of an arbitration award. The opinion does not describe the award’s underlying dispute or state the amount or terms of the award.

The respondent was served on July 1, 2021, but had not appeared. Its deadline to answer, file a motion, or otherwise respond was July 22, 2021.

Court’s Action

The court cited Second Circuit precedent stating that default judgments are generally inappropriate in proceedings to confirm or overturn arbitration awards. Instead, an unanswered petition should be treated as an unopposed motion for summary judgment. Summary judgment is a procedure for deciding a claim based on the submitted materials when the governing standard is satisfied, rather than entering judgment solely because a party failed to appear.

The court ordered that the petition be treated as an unopposed motion for summary judgment. It deemed the petitioner’s motion fully presented and stated that it would decide the motion based on the papers already filed. The order did not grant or deny summary judgment and did not decide 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.