92 A.D.3d 547 | N.Y. App. Div. | 2012
The arbitrator’s failure to determine the nature of the disputed payment warrants the vacatur of award four. Petitioners claim that this payment constituted a bribe. Respondents assert it was a bona fide cost of doing business. We remand for the arbitrator to determine the nature of the payment. Contrary to the arbitrator’s finding, deducting a payment intended to be a bribe to a public official is unenforceable as violative of public policy (see Matter of New York State Correctional Officers & Police Benevolent Assn. v State of New York, 94 NY2d 321, 326 [1999]; Matter of Crosstown Operating Corp. [8910 5th Ave. Rest.], 191 AD2d 384 [1993]; Penal Law art 200).
We reject petitioners’ argument that the arbitrator was required to hear expert valuation evidence related to award two and deemed important by petitioners; the arbitrator’s findings of fact rendered such evidence moot (New York State Correctional Officers & Police Benevolent Assn., 94 NY2d at 326 [“even in circumstances where an arbitrator makes errors of law or fact, courts will not assume the role of overseers to conform the award to their sense of justice”]). Therefore, any failure by the arbitrator to consider such evidence neither renders the final award incomplete nor constitutes misconduct under CPLR 7511.
We have considered the parties’ remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Friedman, Catterson, Renwick and DeGrasse, JJ.