Legal Opinion
Grossman Steel & Aluminum Corp. v. Samson Window Corp.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided June 29, 1981PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
The disputed language in paragraph 9 of the contract did not create a condition precedent to payment to the subcontractor, but rather established a time for payment (cf. Schuler-Hass Elec. Corp. v Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 40 NY2d *655883). Moreover, since the defendant insisted on trying the counterclaims on the merits, despite Special Term’s express offer to sever them because of possible prematurity, we cannot say as a matter of law that the Appellate Division abused its discretion in dismissing with…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Schuler-Haas Electric Co. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1976
3Cited by6 opinions
- Action Interiors, Inc. v. Component Assembly Systems Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
- Crown Plastering Corp. v. Elite Associates, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- Otis Elevator Co. v. George A. Fuller Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
- F.W. Sims, Inc. v. Federal InsuranceDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1992
- Birk Iron Works, Inc. v. Van Tulco, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.