AHMED A. GADELKAREEM, plf-app, v. BLACKBOOK CAPITAL CAPITAL LLC, def-res

570891/13. AHMED A. GADELKAREEM, plf-app, v. BLACKBOOK CAPITAL CAPITAL LLC, def-res — Ordered that the motion is granted to the extent of granting appellant leave to appeal as a poor person. Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq., of the Legal Aid Society, Criminal Appeals Bureau (199 Water Street, 3rd Floor, NY, NY 10038, tel# 212 577-3688) is assigned as counsel for the appellant to prosecute the appeal and to serve without compensation. So Order — Order (James E. D'Auguste, J.), dated September 19, 2014, affirmed, without costs.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

570891/13. AHMED A. GADELKAREEM, plf-app, v. BLACKBOOK CAPITAL CAPITAL LLC, def-res — Ordered that the motion is granted to the extent of granting appellant leave to appeal as a poor person. Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq., of the Legal Aid Society, Criminal Appeals Bureau (199 Water Street, 3rd Floor, NY, NY 10038, tel# 212 577-3688) is assigned as counsel for the appellant to prosecute the appeal and to serve without compensation. So Order — Order (James E. D’Auguste, J.), dated September 19, 2014, affirmed, without costs.

Upon being hired by the defendant securities firm in July 2013, plaintiff executed a Uniform Application for Securities Industry Registration or Transfer Form (Form U–4), which contained a broad arbitration clause requiring plaintiff “to arbitrate any dispute, claim or controversy that may arise” between the parties. Contrary to plaintiff’s contention, the arbitration agreement was not negated by the New York choice of law and consent to jurisdiction provisions of the parties’ August 26, 2013 formal employment contract, which, significantly, contained “no express denial of the agreement to arbitrate” (Isaacs v. Westchester Wood Works, 278 AD2d 184, 185 [2000]; see Edgewater Growth Capital Partners, L.P. v. Greenstar N. Am. Holdings, Inc., 69 AD3d 439 [2010]; see also Bank Julius Baer & Co., Ltd. v. Waxfield Ltd., 424 F3d 278, 284 [2nd Cir 2005] ["we cannot nullify an arbitration clause unless the forum selection clause specifically precludes arbitration"]). Furthermore, since the agreement to arbitrate does not vary or contradict the provisions of the subsequent employment agreement, the merger clause set forth in the employment agreement cannot be read as expressing an intent to revoke retroactively the parties’ arbitration agreement (see Matter of Primex Intl. Corp. v. Wal-Mart Stores, 89 NY2d 594, 600 [1997]).

AHMED A. GADELKAREEM, plf-app, v. BLACKBOOK CAPITAL CAPITAL LLC, def-res

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal