On January 28, 2016, the First Department issued a decision in Madison Realty Capital, L.P. v. Scarborough-St. James Corp., 2016 NY Slip Op. 00596, affirming the confirmation of an arbitral award, explaining:
A court cannot examine the merits of an arbitration award and substitute its judgment for that of the arbitrator simply because it believes its interpretation would be the better one. Indeed, even in circumstances where an arbitrator makes errors of law or fact, courts will not assume the role of overseers to conform the award to their sense of justice. Applying this standard, there is no basis to upset the final award.
. . .
CPLR 7511(c)(1) only authorizes modification of computational errors and mistakes in description, not reversal of substantive rulings. Defendants challenge the arbitrator’s calculation of rent on multiple bases; however, not only are their arguments substantive, they are unavailing.
(Internal quotations and citations omitted) (emphasis added).