Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Substantive rulingFiled Jan. 5, 2022

103 Central Park West Corporation v. Service Employees International Union

Full caption

103 Central Park West Corporation v. Service Employees International Union, Local 32BJ

Judge
Jesse Furman
Docket
1:21-cv-09255
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
ArbitrationSummary JudgmentCivil Procedure
In one sentence

103 Central Park West Corp. v. Service Employees International Union, Local 32BJ: Judge Furman confirmed the entire unopposed arbitration award.

Who this affects

103 Central Park West Corp., Service Employees International Union, Local 32BJ, and Realty Advisory Board on Labor Relations were affected by the court’s confirmation of the entire arbitration award.

What happened

In 103 Central Park West Corp. v. Service Employees International Union, Local 32BJ, the petitioner asked the court to confirm an arbitration award. The petition was also directed against Realty Advisory Board on Labor Relations.

The respondents did not oppose the petition by the deadline. They also informed the court that they did not oppose the requested relief and agreed to the admission of facts supporting confirmation of the award.

After reviewing the petition and supporting materials, Judge Furman found no genuine dispute preventing judgment and no basis under the Federal Arbitration Act to vacate the award. He granted the petition to confirm the entire award.

The detailed version

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

Case
103 Central Park West Corporation v. Service Employees International Union · No. 1:21-cv-09255
Judge
Jesse Furman
Date
Jan. 5, 2022

Background

103 Central Park West Corp. filed a petition to confirm an arbitration award. Although the filing was styled as a complaint, the court treated it as a petition to confirm arbitration. The respondents were Service Employees International Union, Local 32BJ, and Realty Advisory Board on Labor Relations.

The respondents did not file an opposition by the court-ordered deadline. The petitioner later informed the court that the respondents did not oppose the requested relief and consented to admitting the facts submitted in support of the request to confirm the award.

Court’s Analysis

The court explained that an unopposed petition to confirm an arbitration award must be treated like a motion for summary judgment based on the petitioner’s submissions. After reviewing those submissions, the court found no genuine issue of material fact preventing summary judgment as to any part of the award. It also found that the arbitrator’s decision provided more than a barely colorable justification for its result and that there was no basis under Section 10(a) of the Federal Arbitration Act to vacate the award.

Ruling

Judge Furman granted the petitioner’s unopposed petition to confirm the entire arbitration award. The court directed the petitioner to file an updated proposed judgment reflecting the respondents’ failure to oppose by January 12, 2022.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.