Legal Opinion · Dissent
In re the Arbitration between the Board of Education, Union Free School District No. 7 & Heckler Electric Co.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided March 31, 1960Published
1DissentFroessel, J.
We agree with the views expressed in the dissenting opinions below. Appellant Heckler’s claim is clearly an arbitrable one under article 11 of the contract, which expressly provides for arbitration of “ any disagreement [which] shall arise between the .parties hereto” (De Lillo Constr. Co. v. Lizza & Sons, 7 N Y 2d 102; Matter of Lipman [Haeuser Shellac Co.], 289 N. Y. 76). Article 11 embraced disputes with regard to delays attributable to “the failure of the Board of Education to coordinate the work of the several contractors performing work at the site of the project involved ”, and claims…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Matter of Lipman (Haeuser Shellac Co.)New York Court of Appeals · 1942
- In Re the Arbitration Between Western Union Telegraph Co. & American Communications Ass'nNew York Court of Appeals · 1949
- Matter of Kramer Uchitelle, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1942
- Outlet Embroidery Co. v. Derwent Mills, Ltd.New York Court of Appeals · 1930
- Matter of Hosiery Mfrs. Corp. v. . GoldstonNew York Court of Appeals · 1924
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.