Westlaw
Not Reported in F,Supp.2d Page l
Not Reported in F.Supp.2d, 2001 WL 1246583 (S.D.N.Y,)
(Cite as: Not Reported in F.Supp.2d)
H Corporation against Stone & Webster Internatioital
The Shaw Group, lite. tr. Tripletine intern. Corp, Corporation, before the United States Bankruptcy
S.D,N.Y,,200l. Court for the District of Delaware in Jn rc Stone &
Only the Westlaw citation is currently available. Webster Incorpomretzf at ai'., Case No.
United States District Court, S.D.New York, 0O—2l4l(RMl\/1); [and] (3) tor a trial pursuant to
THE SHAW GROUP, lNC., Stone& Webster, C.P,L,R, § 4lO in the event that the Court
lne.,and Stone& Webster Asia, lnc., Petitioners, determines factual issues exist which preclude the
v. Court from granting the above reliet;‘[.]
TRIPLEFINE INTERNATIONAL
CORPORAUON, Respondent. (Order to Show Cause, May 14, 2001, at 2.) The
N0. OI CIV, 4273(LMM). Arbitration was stayed by the order to sltow cause
pending hearin, (Id.)
Oct. 18, 2001.
Respondent, by its motion for reconsideration,
seeks amendment of that part of the Order which
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER permanently enjoined Respondent from arbitrating
MCKENNA, D,]. claims against The Shaw Group, Inc. and Stone &
Webster Asia, ine. Respondent seeks, in substance,
1. a determination that the arbitration of its olaims
against those specific companies is preliminary
*1 Respondent moves tor reconsideration of this only, rather than permanent, so that it can have
Courts Memorandum and Order dated August l, discovery that might support an order requiring
200l (the "Order"). The Order determined a motion arbitration against those companies as well as
made in the New York County Supreme Court by againstStone& Webster, lnc.
petitioners, brought on by order to show cause,
prior to the removal of this case to this Court, in
which petitioners sought an order · 2.
(l} permanently staying the arbitration proceeding
entitled Tiipletinel11te1·national Corporation v.Tl1e Petitioners oross~movo for an order enjoining
Shaw Group Inc, Stone & Webster, inc., Stone & respondent from seeking to recover in the
Webster Asia, inc. and Stone & Webster arbitration damagesdnoltiding attorneys fees and
lntemational Corp., received by Petitioners on April costs-alleged to have resulted from respondents
23, 2001 and brought before the international need to oppose the application of Stone & Webster, ,
Chamber of Commerce (the ‘“Arbitration") with ine, tothe arbitration against it.
respect to Petitioners The Shaw Group, inc. and
Stone & Webster Asia, lnc, on the ground that a
valid arbitration agreement was not made between 3,
Respondent and Petitioners The Shaw Group, inc.
or Stone & Webster Asia, Incl; (2) staying the Respondents motion for reconsideration of the
Arbitration pending resolution of this petition to Order is granted, and, upon reconsideration, the
stay the Arbitration as against The Shaw Group, Order is amended to the extent that the injunction.
inc. and Stone & Webster Asia, ine. and pending against respondents arbitration against The Shaw
resolution of the Proof of Claim and Proof of Cure Group, inc, and Stone & Webster Asia, inc. will be
Claim tiled by Respondent Tripletine international preliminary only, and not permanent, in order that
© 2007 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works.
EXHIBIT G
5 L e
http ://web2.Westlaw.coin/priiit/printstream. aspx?pri?t=HTMLE&destination=atp&str=Split&rs¤W. ., 7/ l 9/2007
N~1
Case 3:07-cv—O2844-JSW Document 32-13 Fnled O9/06/2007 Page 2~Qg°¤3 Ox Lf
N0*tR·cp01·tcd in I-`.Supp.2d Page 2
Not Reported i1)F.SLl`DD.2d, 2001 WL 1246583 (S.D.N.Y.)
(Cite as: Not Reported in F.Supp.2d)
thc parties may conduct discovery as to the course, is an issue: for thc Comm, PczineWe/>ber Inc,
arbitribility of its ciafms againsi those two v. Bybyk, Sl F.3d 1193, 1198 (2d Cir.I996), unless
companies (but not for any other purpose). In it can be said that "thc pzmies thcmselvczs [have:}
considering the motion decided in thc Order, the pr0vidc[ci] that the arbitmtor, not the ccurt, shall
Court overlooked the m0ti0n‘s specific request for determine wt1<:thc1·a¤ issue is arbiuablwld.
judicia} resolution of any factual issues bearing 011
thcmc£i0n,pursu.m1tt0 CPLR § 410. The arbitration clause in this case (Tab 1 to Ex A
to Lockhmf Aff, May I4, 2001 [submittad in NY.
*2 The discovery allowed must be completed not C0, Supreme Court], at 6) renders arbitrablc "[a]1i
later than February 28, 2002. Respondent is to disputes between you and us concerning or arising
submit, not later than March 29, 2002, in writing, out of this Ag1·ccme:m." It docs mt commit thc
may facrs and/or argument in support of the determination whether a particular claim is
proposition that its claims against The Shaw Group, aybitmble rg me m·bixmzm·g_Fm
Inc, and Stone & Webster Asia, Imc. arc zxrbixrablc;
petitioners may have until April 30, 2002 to
respond; and respondent may has/G LUIUI M3}! I3, FN) Bybyk ig nm precedent fgy the
2002 to r<—:ply.FN’ proposition that the arbitratcsm should
determine whether :·cspcmdcm‘s claim for
atc0mcys' fees and costs in the present
FNI. Those dates may bc amended by action is z1rbi,trabIc. The claim for
written stipulation or, for cause shown, by atz0mcys‘ {ccs at issue in Bybyk 2xp·pazu·s to
the Mzagistmtc Judge to whom this case be for att0mcys' fees to bc incurred in the
will be refcemxi. arbitration: the application for an
injunction against the arbitration of the
4. rcsp011d<·mts' claim for at*n0mcys‘ {ccs was,
it appears, included in the pc‘citicmcr's
Pctitionrsrw cross-motion seeks to bar respondent initial special proceeding, before any
{Tom seeking an award in its arbitration against att0mcys‘ fees in the court proceedings
Stone & Webstcy, Ina {01* att<>meys' fees and costs could have been incurred by the
incurred in the present casa (before and after rcspcmdezms.S»2e81F.3dat4l196·97.
removal). Pctiticmcrs urge, principally, that
x·<·:sp0nc1cnt could have marie such a claim in the Fumhexg thee arbitration clause does not provide for
present case, but did not, and that respondent is arbitration of such at‘c0mcys‘ fees and costs as
acccrdingiy barred by claim prcclusion IQYOLD petitioner may have incurred in the New York
seeking in the arbitration thc arrr¤mcys‘ fees and Supreme Court or this court, A claim for such fees
comin questi0n.P
agreement shall be referred to the Intcmaticmxl rclatcd,c0ur&pr0cccdings.
Chamber of Comme-mc, It docs not address the
issue cf am>mcys’ fees or costs but even if it did, it In addition, this Court has jurisdiction, where
would not relate to this proceeding but rather :20 the appropriate, to award em0rneys’ fees and costs
arbitration proceeding itself. incurred in the present action.
(Pc:. Mem Sept. 24, 2002, at 3..) For aha foregoing reasons, pctiti0ncrs’ crcswmcticn
for an order €1')jOi1ljI1g respondent from seeking to
The Iattcr argument, in effect, raises the issue of the recover in the arbitration att0r¤<:ys’ fees amd costs
arbirrabiliry of respcmdcnt's claim for costs and incurrcci in this action. (whcrhcr in the New York
att0mcys' 1"ccs incurred in the present case. That, of Suprcmc Court or this Court) is granted.
© 2007 Thomson/West, No Ckaim to Orig. US, Govt. Works.
http ://wcb2.wcst1aw, com/print/p1·i11tst1·ca411.aspx?p1·ft=HTMLE&dcsti¤ati0n=atp&sv=Sp1i€&rs=\V.., 7/ I 9/2007
N—2 ~
Case 3:O7—cv—O2844-JSW Document 32-13 Filed O9/06/2007 Page 3yQg€3+ OI 4
Nei Repezfied in P.Supp.2c1 pag? 3
N0tRcp011&di1n F.Supp.2<1, 2001 WL 1246583 (S.D.N.Y,)
(Cite as: Not Reported in 1'<`.Supp.2d)
SO ORDERED.
S.D.NiY,,2001.
The Shaw Group, Ihci v. 'hiplezfine Intem. Corp.
Net Rcpeitcd in F.Supp.2d, 2001 WL 1246583
(S.D.N.Y.)
END OF DOCUMENT V
© 2007 Thcmsen/West. No Ciaim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works,
http://web2wcstiaw.com/prixit/prixutstxcazrxaspx?prft=HTMLE&destine1i0n¤atp&sv:Sp1i‘c&rs=W... 7/ 1 9/2007
1 1*1-3
Case 3:07-cv-02844-JSW
Document 32-13
Filed 09/06/2007
Page 1 of 3
Case 3:07-cv-02844-JSW
Document 32-13
Filed 09/06/2007
Page 2 of 3
Case 3:07-cv-02844-JSW
Document 32-13
Filed 09/06/2007
Page 3 of 3
United States Free Forms
Canada Free Forms
United Kingdom Free Forms
Australia Free Forms