Legal Opinion

A. Burgart, Inc. v. Foster-Lipkins Corp.

New York Supreme Court

Decided July 9, 1970PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDaniel E. Maceen, J.

Plaintiff is a subcontractor to defendant Foster-Lipkins Corp., general contractor for construction of a building for defendant Dormitory Authority of the State of New York. Paragraph 19 of the subcontract sets forth a broad all-inclusive arbitration clause. September 25,1969 plaintiff filed with the Dormitory Authority a mechanic’s lien in the sum of $82,318.30 and shortly before the expiration of the six months’ duration period of the lien, commenced this action to foreclose the lien. By this motion defendants seek to stay the action on the ground that plaintiff’s sole remedy is in…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Lycee Francais v. CalagnaNew York Supreme Court · 1960
  2. Mancini v. SternNew York Supreme Court · 1960
  3. In re OxerNew York Supreme Court · 1962

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Madison Lexington Venture v. Thomas Crimmins Contracting Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
  2. A. Burgart, Inc. v. Foster-Lipkins Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1972
  3. D. M. C. Construction Corp. v. A. Leo Nash Steel Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1975
  4. Heimlich v. Charlton Lithographing, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Sommer v. Anthony J. Quarant Contracting, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1972

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API