Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 15, 2022

Trustees Of The New York City District Council Of Carpenters Pension Fund v…

Full caption

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. Mahi Painting, Inc.

Judge
Gregory Woods
Docket
1:22-cv-06496
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
ArbitrationCivil ProcedureSummary Judgment
In one sentence

Trustees v. Mahi Painting: Judge Woods ordered supporting filings and set briefing deadlines for a petition to confirm an arbitration award.

Who this affects

The petitioners seeking confirmation of the arbitration award and Mahi Painting, Inc., the respondent, were affected by the filing, service, and briefing deadlines.

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. Mahi Painting, Inc., the petitioners asked the court to confirm an arbitration award.

The court explained that proceedings to confirm an arbitration award are treated like a motion for summary judgment. It ordered the petitioners to file a required statement and supporting materials, including affidavits or declarations verifying their exhibits. It also set deadlines for Mahi Painting’s opposition and the petitioners’ reply.

The order did not decide whether the arbitration award should be confirmed. Judge Gregory H. Woods also directed the petitioners to serve the petition and supporting materials and file proof of service.

The detailed version

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

Case
Trustees Of The New York City District Council Of Carpenters Pension Fund v… · No. 1:22-cv-06496
Judge
Gregory Woods
Date
Aug. 15, 2022

Background

On August 1, 2022, the petitioners filed a petition asking the court to confirm an arbitration award. The opinion does not describe the underlying dispute or the terms of the award.

Court’s Order

The court stated that proceedings to confirm an arbitration award are treated as similar to a motion for summary judgment. It ordered the petitioners to file and serve a statement required by Local Civil Rule 56.1, along with any additional materials supporting the petition, by August 31, 2022. Those materials could include affidavits or declarations stating that the petition’s exhibits were true and correct copies of the documents they purported to be.

Mahi Painting’s opposition was due October 3, 2022. The petitioners’ reply, if any, was due October 24, 2022. The petitioners were also directed to serve the petition and supporting materials on Mahi Painting and file an affidavit proving service.

Disposition

The court issued scheduling and filing directions. It did not rule on whether to confirm the arbitration award, so this order did not decide the petition’s underlying merits. The opinion states that service was due by March 21, 2022, with proof of service due by March 24, 2022; those dates precede the August 2022 filing and order dates, creating an apparent inconsistency that the opinion does not explain.

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.