Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 5, 2022

Trafelet v. Cipolla & Co. LLC.

Judge
Analisa Torres
Docket
1:22-cv-04888
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
ArbitrationCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Trafelet v. Cipolla & Co., Judge Torres granted the parties’ request to revise the briefing schedule for an arbitration dispute.

Who this affects

Lara S. Trafelet and Cipolla & Co., LLC, whose briefing schedule concerning the arbitration award was revised.

What happened

In Lara S. Trafelet v. Cipolla & Co., LLC, the parties jointly asked the court to pause briefing on Trafelet’s motion to vacate part of an arbitration award until the arbitrator issued a separate award on attorney’s fees and expenses.

The parties proposed that Trafelet file an amended petition and motion addressing both awards, followed by deadlines for Cipolla & Co.’s opposition and request to confirm the awards, Trafelet’s reply and opposition, and Cipolla & Co.’s reply.

Judge Analisa Torres granted the request and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motions listed at ECF Nos. 7, 12, and 20. The order did not decide whether the arbitration award should be vacated or confirmed.

The detailed version

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

Case
Trafelet v. Cipolla & Co. LLC. · No. 1:22-cv-04888
Judge
Analisa Torres
Date
July 5, 2022

Background

Trafelet had filed a petition and motion asking the court to vacate a partial final arbitration award. The award did not resolve attorney’s fees and expenses because the parties had agreed to address those issues separately. Cipolla & Co. was expected to file a cross-motion asking the court to confirm the arbitration award.

The parties jointly asked to hold further briefing on Trafelet’s motion until the arbitrator issued the separate fee award. They proposed that Trafelet then file an amended petition and motion addressing both the merits award and the fee award.

Proposed schedule

Under the proposed schedule, Trafelet would file the amended petition and motion, including a statement required by the court’s local rules, within 30 days after the fee award was issued. Cipolla & Co. would have 30 days to file its opposition and cross-motion to confirm. Trafelet would then have 21 days to file a reply and oppose the cross-motion, and Cipolla & Co. would have 21 days to file its reply.

Ruling

Judge Analisa Torres granted the parties’ request. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motions pending at ECF Nos. 7, 12, and 20. The order set a revised process for future filings; it did not rule on whether the arbitration award should be vacated or confirmed.

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.