E. W. Hoffmann, Inc. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.

48 A.D.2d 695, 368 N.Y.S.2d 48, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9740
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 27, 1975
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 48 A.D.2d 695 (E. W. Hoffmann, Inc. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
E. W. Hoffmann, Inc. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 48 A.D.2d 695, 368 N.Y.S.2d 48, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9740 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover for work, [696]*696labor and services, defendants appeal - from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered September 26, 1974, in favor of plaintiff, upon an order which, inter alia, granted its cross motion for summary judgment. Judgment reversed and order reversed insofar as reviewed, with one bill of $20 costs and disbursements, and cross motion denied. The language of the agreement in question provides that payment of the agreed contract price shall be "in accordance with Section 5 hereof.” Section 5, in turn, provides that the contractor agrees to pay the subcontractor, "upon the payment of certificates * * * the amount allowed to the Contractor on account of the Subcontractor’s work to the extent of the Subcontractor’s interest therein.” Thus, until the certificates are paid, plaintiff is not entitled to be paid. The case upon which plaintiff relies indicates that similar contract language precluded any payment to the subcontractor by the contractor until "approval and payment of its [contractor’s] certificates”; but, further language in the contract provided for payment " 'after his [the subcontractor’s] work is finally approved’ ” (Cable-Wiedemer, Inc. v Friederich & Sons Co., 71 Misc 2d 443, 446). Plaintiff refers us to no contract language of similar import in the contract at issue. Rabin, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Cohalan, Brennan and Munder, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Lowy & Donnath, Inc. v. City of New York
98 A.D.2d 42 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1983)
Watson Construction Co. v. Reppel Steel & Supply Co.
598 P.2d 116 (Court of Appeals of Arizona, 1979)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
48 A.D.2d 695, 368 N.Y.S.2d 48, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9740, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/e-w-hoffmann-inc-v-aetna-casualty-surety-co-nyappdiv-1975.