A motion to compel arbitration in New York asks a Supreme Court judge to enforce a written arbitration agreement, send the dispute to a private arbitrator, and pause the lawsuit while that happens. It is filed under CPLR 7503, and New York courts start from a strong presumption that valid arbitration agreements will be enforced. The filing fee for the motion itself is $45 in Supreme Court; the meaningful costs sit in attorney preparation and the arbitration that follows.1New York State Unified Court System. Filing Fees
The Law the Judge Will Apply
Two frameworks run in parallel. The Federal Arbitration Act governs whenever the underlying contract touches interstate commerce, which covers most commercial agreements. The FAA treats written arbitration agreements as “valid, irrevocable, and enforceable” absent a standard contract defense such as fraud or duress.2govinfo. 9 USC – Arbitration
New York’s own rules live in CPLR Article 75. CPLR 7501 makes a written agreement to arbitrate enforceable regardless of whether the dispute would otherwise belong in court.3New York State Senate. New York Code CPLR 7501 – Effect of Arbitration Agreement CPLR 7503(a) supplies the mechanism: if the opposing party refuses to arbitrate, you can ask the court to compel it, and when there is no substantial question about the agreement’s existence and the claim is not time-barred, the court “shall direct the parties to arbitrate.”4New York State Senate. New York Code CPLR 7503 – Application to Compel or Stay Arbitration That “shall” is doing real work. The judge is not weighing whether arbitration seems like a good idea for this dispute.
The court’s job is narrow. It decides whether a valid arbitration agreement exists and whether the dispute falls within its scope. It does not evaluate the merits of the underlying claim. Broad clauses covering disputes “arising out of or relating to” the contract sweep in most related disagreements; narrower clauses may reach only specified issues, such as payment or performance.
Filing the Motion
The motion goes to New York Supreme Court. If a lawsuit is already pending, you file the motion inside that action. If nothing is pending yet, you commence a special proceeding under Article 75. Either way, the papers must include the arbitration agreement and an affidavit explaining why it is valid and why it covers the dispute.4New York State Senate. New York Code CPLR 7503 – Application to Compel or Stay Arbitration
Service timing follows CPLR 2214. The notice of motion and supporting papers must be served at least eight days before the hearing date. If you want to lock the other side into a set answering schedule, serve at least sixteen days before the hearing; answering papers are then due seven days before, and reply papers one day before.5NYCOURTS.GOV. CPLR 2214 – Motion Papers, Service, Time Missed deadlines can delay or sink the motion.
There is a faster pre-litigation route worth knowing. Under CPLR 7503(c), a party can serve a demand for arbitration or a notice of intention to arbitrate directly on the other side. The notice must identify the arbitration agreement, name the party serving it, and warn the recipient that failing to apply for a stay within twenty days forfeits the right to contest arbitration later. That twenty-day window is unforgiving. Once it lapses, the opposing party loses the ability to argue that no valid agreement exists. Service must be made in the same manner as a summons or by certified mail with return receipt requested.4New York State Senate. New York Code CPLR 7503 – Application to Compel or Stay Arbitration
Most motions to compel are decided on the written submissions, sometimes with oral argument. If the court finds a substantial question about whether a valid agreement was made, it must hold a trial limited to that issue before ruling.
What the Judge Can Do
Three outcomes are possible. The court can grant the motion, in which case the case is stayed and the parties go to arbitration. It can deny the motion, and the lawsuit continues. Or, where the underlying facts are genuinely disputed, it can order a framed-issue trial on whether a binding arbitration agreement exists before deciding.
An order denying arbitration is appealable to the Appellate Division as of right. An order granting the motion can also be challenged, on narrower grounds. Either appeal can significantly delay the underlying case, which both sides weigh when they set their strategy.
The Stay That Follows
Once the motion is granted, CPLR 7503(a) says the order “shall operate to stay a pending or subsequent action, or so much of it as is referable to arbitration.”4New York State Senate. New York Code CPLR 7503 – Application to Compel or Stay Arbitration The stay is mandatory, not discretionary. It freezes discovery and any pending motions so the litigation is not duplicating the arbitrator’s work.
The qualifier matters. If every claim is arbitrable, the whole case pauses. If only some claims are arbitrable, the court may impose a partial stay and let the rest proceed. Parallel tracks are messy and can produce inconsistent results, so when the arbitrable and non-arbitrable claims overlap heavily, courts often stay everything to avoid conflicting outcomes. The stay lasts until the arbitration concludes and the parties return to court to confirm or challenge the award.
How the Other Side Will Fight It
The party resisting arbitration carries the burden, and the presumption cuts against them. Several defenses have real weight when the facts back them up.
No Agreement Was Ever Formed
The most basic attack is that no enforceable agreement exists: the opposing party never signed, never received the terms containing the clause, or the contract lacked offer, acceptance, or consideration. This comes up constantly with online contracts. Courts generally enforce clickwrap agreements where the user affirmatively clicked to accept. Browsewrap agreements, where mere use of a site supposedly constitutes acceptance, draw far more skepticism.
Unconscionability and Cost
Standard contract defenses apply. A party can argue fraudulent inducement, duress, or unconscionability. Under New York law, unconscionability has a procedural component (unfair process, such as a take-it-or-leave-it presentation with no room to negotiate) and a substantive component (terms that are unreasonably one-sided). Courts generally want both, though in extreme cases a provision outrageous on its face can be struck on substantive grounds alone.
A common misconception is that the clause must give both sides identical rights. In Sablosky v. Edward S. Gordon Co., the Court of Appeals upheld an employment clause that let only the employer choose between arbitration and litigation. Mutuality of remedy is not required as long as the overall agreement is supported by consideration. A lopsided clause is not automatically unconscionable, though it can contribute to the argument when paired with other unfair terms.
Cost can also make a clause unenforceable. In Matter of Brady v. Williams Capital Group, the Court of Appeals held that when a party says they cannot afford arbitration, courts must evaluate their finances case by case, looking at the ability to pay the arbitration fees, the expected cost difference between arbitration and court, and whether that gap effectively blocks the claim.
Waiver Through Litigating First
A party that jumps into litigation before invoking its arbitration rights can lose them. In Cusimano v. Schnurr, the Court of Appeals found that plaintiffs who actively pursued their case in court waived their right to arbitrate.6vLex United States. Cusimano v. Schnurr, 26 NY3d 391 The waiver standard shifted in 2022 with Morgan v. Sundance, Inc., where the U.S. Supreme Court eliminated the prejudice requirement that many courts had previously imposed. Under Morgan, a party waives the right when it knows the right exists and acts inconsistently with it. Showing prejudice is no longer part of the FAA analysis. That makes waiver a stronger tool for the side trying to keep the case in court, and a stronger reason to file the motion to compel early.
Scope and Procedural Gaps
Even when the agreement itself is enforceable, the specific dispute may fall outside its scope. Narrow clauses will not cover every disagreement between the parties. The opposing side can also point to unmet conditions precedent in the clause itself, such as a required mediation step, or argue the claim is time-barred.
Federal Carveouts to Watch For
Some arbitration clauses cannot be enforced even when they satisfy every ordinary requirement. The Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act, effective March 2022, lets a person alleging sexual assault or sexual harassment void a pre-dispute arbitration agreement for that claim. The election belongs to the person bringing the allegation, and a court, not an arbitrator, decides whether the exception applies, even where the contract says otherwise.7Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 9 USC 402 – No Validity or Enforceability
The FAA also does not reach employment contracts for transportation workers involved in interstate or foreign commerce, including seamen, railroad employees, and similar workers with a direct role in moving goods across borders.2govinfo. 9 USC – Arbitration For those workers, the FAA’s enforcement mechanisms are unavailable and any arbitration agreement stands or falls on state law alone.
After the Arbitration Ends
Winning at arbitration is not self-executing. Under CPLR 7510, the prevailing party must apply to confirm the award within one year of receiving it, and absent grounds to vacate or modify, the court “shall confirm” it.8New York State Unified Court System. CPLR 7510 – Confirmation of Award The grounds to vacate under CPLR 7511 are deliberately narrow: corruption, fraud, or misconduct in obtaining the award; evident partiality of a neutral arbitrator; the arbitrator exceeding power or failing to issue a final and definite award; or procedural failures under Article 75 that were preserved rather than ignored.9New York State Senate. New York Code CPLR 7511 – Vacating or Modifying Award The FAA offers a parallel list of narrow grounds.10Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 9 US Code 10 – Same, Vacation, Grounds, Rehearing
Courts do not second-guess the arbitrator’s reading of the law or the outcome. Disagreeing with the result is not a ground to vacate. That limited review is the trade-off built into the decision to arbitrate, and New York courts hold parties to it.