WILLIAMS v. NEW YORK MEAT PROVISIONS, 96 Nev. 1 (1980)

604 P.2d 357

No. 10293Supreme Court of Nevada.
January 3, 1980

Appeal from judgments of dismissal, Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Keith C. Hayes, Judge.

Neil R. Slocum, Las Vegas, for Appellant.

Page 2

Morton R. Galane, Las Vegas, for Respondent New York Meat.

Leonard I. Gang, Las Vegas, for Respondent Teamsters 14.

OPINION
Per Curiam:

Appellant filed a complaint in the court below seeking to recover money damages from respondent New York Meat Provisions, Inc., and respondent International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen Helpers of America, Local 14.

Appellant was employed by New York Meat Provisions, Inc., until October 15, 1976, when he was discharged. It is alleged that appellant sought arbitration under the contract between the employer and the union.[1] Christ N. Karamanos was selected as the third and disinterested member of the arbitration committee. Karamanos upheld the discharge on January 31, 1977. Appellant did not move to vacate the award. He filed the instant action on May 2, 1977, seeking to recover money damages from his former employer, the union, and the arbitrator.

Appellant alleged in his complaint that the employer wrongfully discharged him; that the union representative failed to select an impartial arbitrator as contemplated by the contract; and, that the arbitrator had business interests in firms which purchased provisions from the employer and thus was not an impartial arbitrator.[2]

On July 26, 1977, the lower court dismissed appellant’s complaint as to the respondent employer and respondent union,

Page 3

finding that appellant had failed to comply with NRS 38.145.[3]
Chapter 38, Nev. Rev. Stats., known as the Uniform Arbitration Act, applies to matters submitted to arbitration by written agreement or contract between employers and employees or between their respective representatives unless otherwise provided in the agreement. NRS 38.035.

Appellant has never suggested that Ch. 38, Nev. Rev. Stats., does not apply to this case. Appellant’s arguments on appeal centered on the alleged partiality of the arbitration.

Cases cited by appellant are cases in which the aggrieved party sought to disqualify the arbitrator or to vacate the award. None can be read to support plaintiff’s claims for money damages against the union or employer.

The presumption is that no error was committed by the lower court in dismissing the complaint. A Minor v. State, 85 Nev. 323, 454 P.2d 895 (1969). Inasmuch as appellant has not demonstrated that the lower court erred in ruling as it did, the judgment of dismissal is affirmed.

Page 4