Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
MORELLI MASONS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PETER SCALAMANDRE & SONS, INC., et al., Defendants-Respondents.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Ramos, J.), entered April 11, 2001, which, inter alia, granted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the third and fourth causes of action, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
In this action by a subcontractor seeking delay damages from its general contractor and payment on the bond with respect to such claim, the motion court properly held that plaintiff had failed to comply strictly with the notice provision in its subcontract, which, while not containing the conditional “unless” language found in the contract in A.H.A. Gen. Constr., Inc. v. New York City Hous. Auth., 92 N.Y.2d 20, 677 N.Y.S.2d 9, 699 N.E.2d 368, specifically provided that the failure to comply with such provision would constitute a waiver of the subcontractor's claim for damages. Barsotti's, Inc. v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, 254 A.D.2d 211, 680 N.Y.S.2d 88, which involved a claim for extra work under a private contract, is distinguishable. In addition, contrary to plaintiff's argument, here there was no clear relinquishment of the right to rely on the contractual provision by an indisputable departure based on a course of conduct or oral agreement (cf., Austin v. Barber, 227 A.D.2d 826, 828, 642 N.Y.S.2d 972).
We deem it significant, as did the motion court, that plaintiff did not comply in any manner with the separate contractual requirement to itemize the costs attributable to the alleged delays, and note that this was also a basis for dismissal.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: May 02, 2002
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)