Metso Minerals Canada, Inc. v. ArcelorMittal Exploitation Miniere Canada, 19 Civil 3379 (LAP). (2019)
Court: District Court, S.D. New York
Number: infdco20191120f05
Visitors: 9
Filed: Nov. 18, 2019
Latest Update: Nov. 18, 2019
Summary: REVISED JUDGMENT LORETTA A. PRESKA , District Judge . It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Opinion & Order dated November 4, 2019, and Order dated November 12, 2019, Metso's motion to confirm the arbitration award is granted, and ArcelorMittal's cross-motion to vacate the award is denied; the Final Award is hereby confirmed and recognized; judgment is entered against ArcelorMittel in the amount of $258,900; judgment is entered against Arc
Summary: REVISED JUDGMENT LORETTA A. PRESKA , District Judge . It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Opinion & Order dated November 4, 2019, and Order dated November 12, 2019, Metso's motion to confirm the arbitration award is granted, and ArcelorMittal's cross-motion to vacate the award is denied; the Final Award is hereby confirmed and recognized; judgment is entered against ArcelorMittel in the amount of $258,900; judgment is entered against Arce..
More
REVISED JUDGMENT
LORETTA A. PRESKA, District Judge.
It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Opinion & Order dated November 4, 2019, and Order dated November 12, 2019, Metso's motion to confirm the arbitration award is granted, and ArcelorMittal's cross-motion to vacate the award is denied; the Final Award is hereby confirmed and recognized; judgment is entered against ArcelorMittel in the amount of $258,900; judgment is entered against ArcelorMittel in the additional amount of $4,503,797.32; and the Court retains jurisdiction over the parties and the matter for any further proceedings as may be necessary to enforce the Final Award or this judgment.
Source: Leagle
