Originally from Dispute Resolution Journal

Preview Page

REVIEW OF COURT DECISIONS JUDGMENT ON THE AWARD — AMENDMENT TO ADD NEW RESPONDENT AS CO-OBLIGOR — CPLR 1502 & 103(b) — NEW YORK

Where petitioner in erroneous belief that only one person was proprietor of company proceeded to arbitration and then, daring proceeding supplementary to execution of judgment entered on award for which he served only that party, petitioner discovered that there was a partner in the business, and when upon learning of the second respondent, petitioner moved to amend the judgment so as to add the partner as a judgment debtor, court held that the petitioner had complied with statutes relating to actions against a co-obligor to make him amenable to original judgment and was entitled to relief nowithstanding claim of other respondent that an entirely new proceeding to confirm award should have been commenced. In {^ranting the petitioner's application to confirm the award and enter judgment against both partners, the court found that CPLR 1502, which speaks in terms of an "action" against a co-obligor to make him amenable to the original judgment, was applicable to Article 75 (the New York Arbitration Law), the end product of which is, like an action, to be a judgment. Supporting its conclusion, the court quoted from CPLR 103(b) which states "procedures in special proceedings shall be the same as in actions, and the provisions of the civil practice law and rules applicable to actions shall be applicable to special proceedings." The court also found that, having jurisdiction over the parties, the "proceeding shall not be dismissed solely because it is not brought in the proper form . . . [CPLR 103(c)]."

Lauratex Textile Corp. V. Gorin, 322 N.Y.S.2d 76 (App. Div. 1st Dept. 1971).