Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

60 Barb. 150

10 Abb.Pr. 92

Dibble v. Camp

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1871

New York Supreme Court · decided 1871-01-15

Calvin B. Dibble, Barzilla G. Worth, and George M. Dewey, entered into an agreement with Calvin B. Camp, by which the former agreed to sell the latter a quantity of cotton. A part of the cotton having been destroyed by fire, while the process of delivery was going on, a controversy arose as to whether the delivery was complete, and entitled the sellers to full payment.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently November 1903

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1871-01-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

By the Court.—Ingraham, P. J.

¶1We are all of the opinion that this judgment must be affirmed. If the plaintiff feels aggrieved at the award, his only remedy is to move the court at special term, either for an order modifying the award, or for an order vacating it; and upon the grounds and in the manner provided by the Revised Statutes. It is conceded by the *96counsel for the appellant, that he has no statutory grounds for such a motion. He is therefore concluded by the judgment, which can only be reviewed by a writ of error; and he has no right to make a case and appeal thereon, for the purpose of reviewing the award made by the arbitrators on the merits.

¶2The court will not in any case review an award made by arbitrators under the statute, except on the grounds specifically provided by the Revised Statutes, viz: fraud or undue means in procuring it, evident partiality or corruption in the arbitrators, misconduct or excess of power on their part, imperfect award, miscalculation, mistake, or unauthorized award (2 Rev. Stat., 542, §§ 10, 11).

¶3Geo. G. Barnard and Cardozo, JJ., concurred.

¶4Judgment affirmed, with costs.

/60/barb/150 · .json · Public domain