Matter of Czarnikow-Rionda Co., Inc., 80 Civ. 6446 (GLG).
| Citation | 512 F. Supp. 1308 |
| Decision Date | 04 May 1981 |
| Docket Number | No. 80 Civ. 6446 (GLG).,80 Civ. 6446 (GLG). |
| Parties | In the Matter of the Arbitration between CZARNIKOW-RIONDA CO., INC., as Voyage Charterer of the M.V. Paean, and Manumante S.A., as Time-Chartered Owner of the M.V. Paean, and between Reyes Compania Naviera S.A., as Owner of the M.V. Paean. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
McHugh, Leonard & O'Conor, New York City, for Czarnikow-Rionda Co., Inc. by Daniel J. O'Callaghan, James M. Kenny, New York City, of counsel.
Hill, Rivkins, Carey, Loesberg, O'Brien & Mulroy, New York City, for Manumante S.A. by J. Edwin Carey, New York City, of counsel.
Healy & Baillie, New York City, for Reyes Compania Naviera S.A. by Raymond A. Connell, New York City, of counsel.
Manumante S.A. ("Manumante"), time charterer of the M.V. Paean, petitions for an order directing consolidation of arbitration proceedings between Reyes Compania Naviera S.A. ("Reyes"), owners of the M.V. Paean, and Manumante, and between Manumante and Czarnikow-Rionda Co., Inc. ("Czarnikow"), voyage charterers of the vessel.
On February 29, 1980, Reyes entered into a time charter agreement with Manumante which provides for all disputes between the owners and charterers to be arbitrated before a panel of three persons, one to be appointed by each of the parties and a third by the two so chosen. On April 22, 1980, Manumante entered into a voyage charter with Czarnikow. That charter agreement also has an arbitration clause providing for arbitration before a panel of three persons, one to be appointed by each of the parties and a third by the two so chosen.
When Czarnikow made a claim against Manumante for an alleged short lifting of cargo, Manumante and Czarnikow each appointed arbitrators pursuant to the arbitration clause of their voyage charter agreement. Manumante then made a demand for arbitration under its charter agreement with Reyes for the claims asserted by Czarnikow. Manumante seeks to consolidate the arbitration since both disputes arise out of the same facts and circumstances.
Enforcement of an arbitration clause in federal court is controlled by the Federal Arbitration Act ("Act"), 9 U.S.C. §§ 1-14. Although the Act does not specifically provide for consolidated arbitrations, courts have frequently ordered consolidated arbitration proceedings when the "interests of justice" so require either because the issues in dispute are substantially the same and/or because a substantial right might be prejudiced if separate arbitration proceedings are conducted. See, e. g., Compania Espanola de Petroleos, S.A. v. Nereus Shipping, S.A., 527 F.2d 966 (1975), cert. denied, 426 U.S. 936, 96 S.Ct. 2650, 49 L.Ed.2d 387 (1976); Marine Trading Ltd. v. Ore International Corp., 432 F.Supp. 683 (S.D.N.Y.1977); Robinson v. Warner, 370 F.Supp. 828 (D.C.R.I. 1974); cf. Fed.R.Civ.P. 81(a)(3) and 42(a) ().
The major obstacle to consolidation here is the selection of the panel. Both agreements provide specifically for a panel of three arbitrators, one of which is to be selected by the arbitrators rather than by the parties in the dispute. The parties are not willing to waive their right to appoint an arbitrator nor are they willing to modify the arbitration agreements to permit the third arbitrator to be appointed by one of the parties rather than by the arbitrators. Consequently, a completely consolidated arbitration does not appear to be possible under the terms of the agreements.
The Second Circuit has held, however, that the District Judge can mold the method of selection and the number of arbitrators to implement the consolidated proceedings. Compania Espanola de Petroleos, S.A. v. Nereus Shipping S.A., supra, 527 F.2d at 975. See also, Marine Trading Ltd. v. Ore International Corp....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Southland Corporation v. Keating
... ... jurisdiction to resolve this question as a matter of federal law under § 1257(2). Pp. 6-9 ... In The Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co., 407 U.S. 1, 12, 92 S.Ct. 1907, 1914, 32 ... Kimbell Foods, Inc., 440 U.S. 715, 99 S.Ct. 1448, 59 L.Ed.2d 711 ... , 49 L.Ed.2d 387 (1976); In re Czarnikow-Rionda Co., 512 F.Supp. 1308, 1309 (SDNY 1981). This, ... granted 362 U.S. 909, 80 S.Ct. 682, 4 L.Ed.2d 618, dismissed pursuant to ... Fed.Rule Civ.Proc. 81; Fed.Rule Evid. 1101; Fed.Rule ... ...
-
Blue Cross of California v. Superior Court, B122446
... ... Ivie, McNeill & Wyatt, Inc., Barry Reed and Jay R. Taylor, Los Angeles, for ... 834, 130 L.Ed.2d 753; see Kulukundis Shipping Co. v. Amtorg Trading Corp. (2d Cir.1942) 126 F.2d ... 360, 645 P.2d 1192; see Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.3, subd. (3).) In Keating, the ... implement the consolidated proceedings.' (Matter of Czarnikow-Rionda Co. Inc. [ (S.D.N.Y.1981) ... on other grds. (1960) 362 U.S. 628, 636, 80 S.Ct. 1050, 4 L.Ed.2d 1002 [federal ... ...
-
Keating v. Superior Court
... ... Scissor-Tail, Inc. (1981) 28 Cal.3d 807, 817, 171 Cal.Rptr. 604, ... were not subject to arbitration as a matter of contract interpretation and also as a ... (A/S J. Ludwig Mowinckels R. v. Dow Chem. Co. (1970) 25 N.Y.2d 576, 307 N.Y.S.2d 660, 666, 255 ... 873; 9 U.S.C. § 3; Code Civ.Proc., § 1281.2, subd. (a)), and " 'indulge ... are conducted." (Matter of Czarnikow-Rionda Co., [31 Cal.3d 611] Inc. (S.D.N.Y.1981) 512 ... ...
-
Litton Bionetics, Inc. v. Glen Const. Co., Inc.
... ... matter of agreement between the parties, the problem of ... process somewhat bolstered by Fed.R.Civ.P. 81(a) and 42(a). See, e. g., Compania ... , 49 L.Ed.2d 387 (1976); In re Czarnikow-Rionda Co., Inc. (Manumante, S.A. and Reyes Compania ... ...