IN RE STONINGTON MGMT. CORP. v. FURTSCH

Vacatur of an arbitrator's award is statutorily limited to occasions involving fraud, corruption or bias — factors not present here — or occasions when the arbitrator exceeded his or her power, or so imperfectly executed it that a final and definite award was not made (see CPLR 7511[b]; Local 375 v. New York City Health Hosps. Corp., 257 A.D.2d 530, 532). Absent a statutory basis, vacatur is unauthorized (see Matter of Sims v. Siegelson, 246 A.D.2d 374, 377). Here, the arbitrators' finding that the written agreements between petitioner and respondent did not give petitioner ownership of an internet business developed by respondent was supported by the evidence. Petitioner, in seeking vacatur of the award, thus failed to meet its burden to demonstrate that the award was irrational, or in violation of public policy or otherwise in excess of the arbitrators' powers (see Matter of Travelers Ins. Co. v. Job, 239 A.D.2d 289, 293).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.