Legal Opinion
Pettinaro Construction Co. v. Harry C. Partridge, Jr., & Sons, Inc.
Court of Chancery of Delaware
Decided October 15, 1979PublishedCited by 34 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HARTNETT, Vice Chancellor.
This action was commenced to compel arbitration. For the reasons set forth, I find that the plaintiff’s claim is not ripe, at this time, for an Order compelling arbitration.
The Pettinaro Construction Co., Inc. (Pet-tinaro), and the defendant, Harry C. Partridge, Jr., and Sons, Inc., a subcontractor of plaintiff, entered into a contract incorporating by reference the arbitration provisions of a general contract then existing between Pettinaro and the State of Delaware for the construction of certain juvenile detention facilities. After completion of the work called…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
- John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. LivingstonSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Atcas v. Credit Clearing Corporation of AmericaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1972
- University of Alaska v. Modern Construction, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1974
- Frederick Contractors, Inc. v. Bel Pre Medical Center, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1975
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Elf Atochem North America, Inc. v. JaffariSupreme Court of Delaware · 1999
- Graham v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of Delaware · 1989
- Gold Coast Mall, Inc. v. Larmar Corp.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1983
- SBC Interactive, Inc. v. Corporate Media PartnersSupreme Court of Delaware · 1998
- Asset Acceptance, LLC v. NewbySupreme Court of Arkansas · 2014
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.