MATTER OF DYE v. New York City Transit Auth., 442 N.E.2d 1271 (NY 1982). · Go Syfert
Search
MATTER OF DYE v. New York City Transit Auth., 442 N.E.2d 1271 (NY 1982). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
47 citation events (16 in the last 25 years) across 8 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Matter of Kubiak v. Derenda (nyappdiv, 2017-05-05)
Treatment trajectory · 1983 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1983 2004 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Kubiak v. Derenda
N.Y. App. Div. · 2017 · confidence medium
Auth., 57 NY2d 917, 920 [1982]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Sheffield v. Sheriff of the Rockland County Sheriff Department
2d Cir. · 2010 · confidence medium
City Transit Auth., 57 N.Y.2d 917 , 456 N.Y.S.2d 760 , 442 N.E.2d 1271, 1271 (1982) (“challenge to the arbitrator’s award on the merits” is “not available” under Article 78, and' must be made pursuant to C.P.L.R. § 7511).
cited Cited as authority (rule) United States Fire Insurance v. Federal Insurance
S.D.N.Y. · 1987 · confidence medium
Group, 57 N.Y.2d 920, 922-23 , 456 N.Y.S.2d 760 , 761, 442 N.E.2d 1271, 1272 (1982).
discussed Cited "see" St. Paul Mercury Insurance v. Lexington Insurance (2×)
S.D. Tex. · 1995 · signal: see · confidence high
See Kansas City Fire & Marine Insurance Co. v. Hartford Insurance Group, 57 N.Y.2d 920 , 442 N.E.2d 1271 , 456 N.Y.S.2d 760 (1982); Jefferson Insurance Co. v. Glens Falls Insurance *1386 Co., 88 A.D.2d 925 , 450 N.Y.S.2d 888 (2nd Dept.1982); American Home Assurance Co. v. Hartford Ins.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of Ferman Dye, Appellant,
v.
New York City Transit Authority, Respondent
New York Court of Appeals.
Oct 19, 1982.
442 N.E.2d 1271
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL, David B. Lubash for appellant., Robert A. Rifkin and RichardK. Bernard for respondent.
Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer Concur.
Cited by 33 opinions  |  Published

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be hffirmed, with costs.

The determination upholding as against a claim of unconstitutionality the provision in the collective bargaining[*920] agreement for arbitration of employee disciplinary grievances accords with the law of this State (Antinore v State of New York, 40 NY2d 921). With respect to the challenge to the arbitrator’s award on the merits, review under article 78 is not available (see CPLR 7511). Appellant’s claim based on the alleged failure of respondent to have reinstated him to his former position in accordance with the terms of the arbitration award is not within the scope of this proceeding as defined by the petition.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to rule 500.2 (b) of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.2 [g]), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.