Majority
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Milton A. Tingling, J), entered February 7, 2014, confirming the arbitration award, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
The arbitrator’s innocuous conversation with petitioner was not shown to have prejudiced respondent (see Matter of Hausknecht v Comprehensive Med. Care of N.Y., P.C., 24 AD3d 778 , 780 [2d Dept 2005]). The award of damages for additional work pursuant to respondent’s oral directives was not in manifest disregard of the law or in excess of the arbitrator’s powers (see Wien & Malkin LLP v Helmsley-Spear, Inc., 6 NY3d 471 , 480-481 [2006], cert dismissed 548 US 940 [2006]; Matter of New York City Tr. Auth. v Transport Workers’ Union of Am., Local 100, AFL-CIO, 6 NY3d 332 [2005]).
Concur — Gonzalez, EJ., Mazzarelli, Manzanet-Daniels, Gische and Clark, JJ.
Cases cited
- Hausknecht v. Comprehensive Medical Care of New York, P.C. 24 AD3d 778 at 780 p. 533
- Wien & Malkin LLP v. Helmsley-Spear, Inc. 6 NY3d 471 at 480-481 p. 533
- New York City Transit Authority v. Transport Workers' Union of America 6 NY3d 332 p. 533