Matter of the Arbitration between Solkav Solkav and New York City Transit Authority, 58 N.Y.2d 95 (1983): Tolling Provisions for Infancy in Arbitration Confirmation

Matter of the Arbitration between Solkav Solkav and New York City Transit Authority, 58 N.Y.2d 95 (1983)

The general tolling provision for infancy under CPLR 208 does not apply to the specific one-year time limit for confirming arbitration awards under CPLR 7510.

Summary

This case addresses whether the tolling provision for infancy applies to the one-year statute of limitations for confirming an arbitration award. The Court of Appeals held that it does not, reasoning that the specific provisions governing arbitration confirmation in CPLR Article 75 take precedence over the general tolling provisions of CPLR 208. The court emphasized that a guardian ad litem, required for initiating arbitration on behalf of an infant, can ensure timely confirmation of any resulting award, thus mitigating potential hardship.

Facts

An infant petitioner was injured on a New York City Transit Authority bus on January 8, 1977. A guardian ad litem was appointed to initiate a no-fault arbitration proceeding on the infant’s behalf. An arbitration award was issued in favor of the infant on May 1, 1979. The guardian ad litem delayed applying to confirm the award until December 1980, which was beyond the one-year period prescribed by CPLR 7510.

Procedural History

Special Term denied the application to confirm the arbitration award as time-barred. The Appellate Division reversed, applying the toll for infancy under CPLR 208 and remitting the proceeding to Special Term for a determination on the merits. The New York Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Division’s decision and dismissed the petition.

Issue(s)

Whether the tolling provision for infancy, as prescribed in CPLR 208, applies to an application to confirm an arbitration award pursuant to CPLR 7510, which requires such application to be made within one year of the award’s delivery.

Holding

No, because the specific provisions of CPLR Article 75 governing arbitration confirmations override the general tolling provisions for infancy under CPLR 208.

Court’s Reasoning

The court reasoned that CPLR Article 75 provides a comprehensive framework for arbitration proceedings, including specific time limits for confirming awards. CPLR 7510 mandates that applications to confirm an award be made within one year of its delivery. CPLR 7512 allows for extensions of this time limit in cases of death or incompetency but conspicuously omits any similar provision for infancy. The court applied the principle that specific statutory provisions take precedence over general ones.

The court further noted the practical considerations: “Inasmuch as the appointment of a guardian ad litem will be required for the institution of the arbitration proceeding, that guardian will be available and authorized to make a timely application to confirm any award which may be made in the infant’s favor.” This suggests that the requirement of a guardian ad litem, who is responsible for protecting the infant’s interests, mitigates any potential hardship resulting from the lack of a specific tolling provision for infancy in CPLR 7510.

The court, in effect, balanced the policy favoring the prompt resolution of disputes through arbitration against the traditional protections afforded to infants under the law, ultimately concluding that the specific statutory scheme for arbitration took precedence in this instance.