| Revis v Schwartz |
| 2022 NY Slip Op 01867 [38 NY3d 939] |
| March 17, 2022 |
| Court of Appeals |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. |
| As corrected through Wednesday, April 27, 2022 |
| Darrelle Revis et al., Appellants, v Neil Schwartz et al., Respondents. |
Argued February 9, 2022; decided March 17, 2022
Revis v Schwartz, 192 AD3d 127, affirmed.
Williams & Connolly LLP, Washington, D.C. (Mark S. Levinstein, of the District of Columbia bar, admitted pro hac vice, and William I. Stewart, of the District of Columbia bar, admitted pro hac vice, of counsel), and Krovatin Nau LLC, Newark, New Jersey (Helen A. Nau of counsel), for appellants.
Duane Morris LLP, New York City (Mario A. Aieta of counsel), for respondents.
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs. Based on the allegations in the complaint, alleging intertwined claims of breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, and equitable fraud and seeking rescission of all the parties' agreements plus damages and disgorgement of fees arising therefrom, the Appellate Division properly concluded that the gateway questions of arbitrability should be resolved by the arbitrator (see Garthon Bus. Inc. v Stein, 30 NY3d 943, 944 [2017]; Life Receivables Trust v Goshawk Syndicate 102 at Lloyd's, 14 NY3d 850, 851 [2010]; Matter of Board of Educ. of Watertown City School Dist. [Watertown Educ. Assn.], 93 NY2d 132, 143 [1999]; see generally Henry Schein, Inc. v Archer & White Sales, Inc., 586 US &mdash, 139 S Ct 524 [2019]).
Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Rivera, Garcia, Wilson, Singas, Cannataro and Troutman concur.
Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.