In re the Arbitration between Elora Realty, Inc. & William Savage, Inc.

New York Court of Appeals

In re the Arbitration between Elora Realty, Inc. & William Savage, Inc.

114 N.E.2d 39, 305 N.Y. 842, 1953 N.Y. LEXIS 1338

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedJuly 14, 1953

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 114 N.E.2d 39 (In re the Arbitration between Elora Realty, Inc. & William Savage, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re the Arbitration between Elora Realty, Inc. & William Savage, Inc., 114 N.E.2d 39, 305 N.Y. 842, 1953 N.Y. LEXIS 1338 (N.Y. 1953).

Pincite

Opinions

Per Curiam.

It is unnecessary to decide whether or not article 40 is a general arbitration clause since the dispute in this instance is as to a matter which, by article 39, is specifically made subject to arbitration by way of appeal from a decision of the architect. Although respondent’s demand for arbitration was, under article 39, premature since served before the architect had rendered a decision, that irregularity should not destroy respondent’s rights to have the dispute arbitrated now that the architect, as shown by the record here, has issued his certifications in writing that respondent has breached the contract and that nothing is due respondent thereon.

The order should be affirmed, with costs.

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

Per Curiam.

It is unnecessary to decide whether or not article 40 is a general arbitration clause since the dispute in this instance is as to a matter which, by article 39, is specifically made subject to arbitration by way of appeal from a decision of the architect. Although respondent’s demand for arbitration was, under article 39, premature since served before the architect had rendered a decision, that irregularity should not destroy respondent’s rights to have the dispute arbitrated now that the architect, as shown by the record here, has issued his certifications in writing that respondent has breached the contract and that nothing is due respondent thereon.

The order should be affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

114 N.E.2d 39, 305 N.Y. 842, 1953 N.Y. LEXIS 1338, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-arbitration-between-elora-realty-inc-william-savage-inc-ny-1953.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack