Schindler Elevator Corp. v. Tully Construction Co., Inc.
New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
139 A.D.3d 930, 30 N.Y.S.3d 707 (2016)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Schindler Elevator Corporation (plaintiff) signed a contract with Tully Construction Company, Inc. (defendant), to install elevators in a garage Tully was building. The contract incorporated Tully’s primary garage contract with the City of New York. The primary contract stated that a contractor claiming delay damages must provide explicit notice of the details and verified statements of the amounts of such damages within 45 days of the first incurrence of the damages. The contract also stated that a failure to strictly comply with the notice condition would be construed as a waiver of any such delay claims. There were delays in the garage project, and Schindler sued Tully to recover damages resulting from the delays. Schindler had not provided verified statements of the details of the delays. Tully thus argued that Schindler did not strictly comply with the notice provision in the primary contract and thereby waived its right to delay damages. Schindler argued that Tully’s actual notice of the delays was sufficient. The Supreme Court of New York found in favor of Schindler. Tully appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
What to do next…
Here's why 803,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
