Gilbert v. Burnstine

In 1925, Harry Burnstine and A. Joseph Geist, two attorneys who were citizens and residents of New York (defendants), contracted with Jacques Gilbert to sell and deliver to them zinc concentrates. The contract contained an arbitration clause requiring the submission of disputes to arbitration in London, England, under English arbitration law. A dispute arose, and Gilbert gave Burnstine and Geist notice of his intent to submit the matter to arbitration. Burnstine and Geist did not respond. Gilbert started arbitration proceedings in London, and at each step of the proceedings (service of process, selection of arbitrator, intervention by the London courts to appoint the arbitrator, prearbitration hearings, and the arbitration itself), Burnstine and Geist ignored the matter. The result was an arbitration judgment in favor of Gilbert. Gilbert then filed an action in New York courts seeking to enforce and collect on the judgment. Burnstine and Geist opposed that action, arguing that the arbitration clause was unenforceable, that the English courts and arbitration panels had no jurisdiction over them, and that their due-process rights had been violated. In a motion for judgment on the pleadings, Burnstine and Geist contended that the sole issue for the court to consider was whether the English courts had any personal jurisdiction over them absent them being present and served in England. The trial court agreed that the English court did not have personal jurisdiction over them and dismissed the action. Gilbert appealed.