Clockwork Development Venture v. Catamount Construction Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Clockwork Development Venture v. Catamount Construction Corp.

95 A.D.2d 672, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18569

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 7, 1983·Published

Opinion

— Motion for stay denied. Petitioner’s participation in the arbitration, however, shall not be deemed to have waived the claim that a condition precedent to arbitration has not been complied with. Appellant is directed to perfect the appeal for the October, 1983 Term. In the event the appeal is not so perfected, [673]*673the stipulation of the parties shall be of no further force or effect. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Ross, Asch, Kassal and Alexander, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

— Motion for stay denied. Petitioner’s participation in the arbitration, however, shall not be deemed to have waived the claim that a condition precedent to arbitration has not been complied with. Appellant is directed to perfect the appeal for the October, 1983 Term. In the event the appeal is not so perfected, [673]*673the stipulation of the parties shall be of no further force or effect. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Ross, Asch, Kassal and Alexander, JJ.

Clockwork Development Venture v. Catamount Construction Corp., 95 A.D.2d 672, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18569 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

95 A.D.2d 672 (Clockwork Development Venture v. Catamount Construction Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.