Julius R. Nasso v Loeb & Loeb, LLP

Nasso v Loeb & Loeb, LLP 2005 NY Slip Op 05038 [19 AD3d 465] June 13, 2005 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, August 24, 2005

Julius R. Nasso, Appellant,
v
Loeb & Loeb, LLP, Respondent.

—[*1]

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of fiduciary duty, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Solomon, J.), dated March 29, 2004, which granted the defendant's motion to stay the prosecution of the action pending arbitration.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the arbitration clause at issue contained in the parties' March 29, 2000, retainer agreement is clear, explicit, and unequivocal, and all of the plaintiff's claims fall within the broad scope of this arbitration clause (see Stoll Am. Knitting Mach. v Creative Knitwear Corp., 5 AD3d 586 [2004]). Moreover, since the plaintiff was unable to raise a substantial question as to whether a valid agreement to arbitrate was made, no hearing was warranted on that issue (see Matter of Cassone, 100 AD2d 606 [1984]). Therefore, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant's motion to stay prosecution of the action pending arbitration.

The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit. H. Miller, J.P., Ritter, Goldstein and Spolzino, JJ., concur.