JGA Construction Corp. v. Burns Electric Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

JGA Construction Corp. v. Burns Electric Co.

145 A.D.2d 945, 536 N.Y.S.2d 318, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13995

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 23, 1988

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 145 A.D.2d 945 (JGA Construction Corp. v. Burns Electric 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

JGA Construction Corp. v. Burns Electric Co., 145 A.D.2d 945, 536 N.Y.S.2d 318, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13995 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Petitioner, JGA Construction Corporation (JGA), appeals from an order denying its application for a stay of arbitration (see, CPLR 7503 [b]). JGA argues that no valid agreement to arbitrate was made.

The parties entered into a subcontract whereby respondent, Burns Electric Co., Inc. (Burns), agreed to perform electrical work on a project known as The Galleries of Syracuse. Article 13 of the subcontract contained language providing for the resolution of all claims and disputes by arbitration. Article 1 of the subcontract incorporated by reference the general conditions of the contract documents between JGA and the owner, including addendum No. 2, dated June 5, 1985. This addendum deleted the arbitration requirement thereby creating an apparent conflict with article 13 of the subcontract, which mandated arbitration. The apparent conflict, however, is resolved by the language of section 11.1.1 of the subcontract [946]*946to the effect that where any provision of the contract between JGA and the owner is inconsistent with any provision of the subcontract, the subcontract shall govern.

Applying fundamental principles of contract construction (see, Zion v Kurtz, 50 NY2d 92, 105; Matter of Village of Jordan v Memphis Constr. Co., 109 AD2d 1055, 1056), we conclude that the parties expressly, unequivocally, and unambiguously agreed to arbitrate this dispute (Matter of Waldron [Goddess], 61 NY2d 181, 183-184; Matter of Acting Supt. of Schools [United Liverpool Faculty Assn.], 42 NY2d 509, 513; Brennan v A. G. Becker, Inc., 127 AD2d 951, 952). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Donovan, J. —arbitration.) Present — Doerr, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Pine and Davis, JJ.

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

— Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Petitioner, JGA Construction Corporation (JGA), appeals from an order denying its application for a stay of arbitration (see, CPLR 7503 [b]). JGA argues that no valid agreement to arbitrate was made.

The parties entered into a subcontract whereby respondent, Burns Electric Co., Inc. (Burns), agreed to perform electrical work on a project known as The Galleries of Syracuse. Article 13 of the subcontract contained language providing for the resolution of all claims and disputes by arbitration. Article 1 of the subcontract incorporated by reference the general conditions of the contract documents between JGA and the owner, including addendum No. 2, dated June 5, 1985. This addendum deleted the arbitration requirement thereby creating an apparent conflict with article 13 of the subcontract, which mandated arbitration. The apparent conflict, however, is resolved by the language of section 11.1.1 of the subcontract [946]*946to the effect that where any provision of the contract between JGA and the owner is inconsistent with any provision of the subcontract, the subcontract shall govern.

Applying fundamental principles of contract construction (see, Zion v Kurtz, 50 NY2d 92, 105; Matter of Village of Jordan v Memphis Constr. Co., 109 AD2d 1055, 1056), we conclude that the parties expressly, unequivocally, and unambiguously agreed to arbitrate this dispute (Matter of Waldron [Goddess], 61 NY2d 181, 183-184; Matter of Acting Supt. of Schools [United Liverpool Faculty Assn.], 42 NY2d 509, 513; Brennan v A. G. Becker, Inc., 127 AD2d 951, 952). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Donovan, J. —arbitration.) Present — Doerr, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Pine and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

145 A.D.2d 945, 536 N.Y.S.2d 318, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13995, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jga-construction-corp-v-burns-electric-co-nyappdiv-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack