Defendants dispute the quality, necessity and "reasonableness" of plaintiff's performance under the interference agreement, and claim that plaintiff's demand for further payment is subject to a broad arbitration clause contained in plaintiff's contract with the City. Under addendum No. 5, section U of plaintiff's contract with the City, entitled "Additional Contract Requirements Applying to Work Performed in the Presence of Privately Owned Utility Facilities," plaintiff was...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.