Hudik-Ross, Inc. v. 1530 Palisade Ave. Corp., HUDIK-ROS

CourtNew Jersey Superior Court – Appellate Division
Writing for the CourtLORA
Parties, a corporation of the State of New Jersey, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. 1530 PALISADE AVENUE CORP., a corporation of the State of New Jersey, Defendant-Appellant.PLUMBING, INC., et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. 1530 PALISADE AVENUE CORP., a corporation of the State of New Jersey, Defendant-Appellant., a corporation of the State of New Jersey, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. H. R. SHAPIRO, INC., a corporation of the State of New Jersey, Defendant-Appellant. H. R. SHAPIRO CORPORATION, a corporation of the State of New Jersey, Plaintiff-Appellant, v., a corporation of the State of New Jersey, Defendant-Respondent. Herbert W. DAVIS, et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. AMERICANA ASSOCIATES, Defendant-Appellant Third-Party Plaintiff, v., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent. Bernard BLATT, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. AMERICANA ASSOCIATES, Defendant-Appellant Third-Party Plaintiff, v., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent. Larry MANUS, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. AMERICAN ASSOCIATES, Defendant-Appellant.
Decision Date06 November 1974
Docket NumberHUDIK-ROS,INC,H-R

Page 159

131 N.J.Super. 159
329 A.2d 70
HUDIK-ROSS, INC., a corporation of the State of New Jersey,
Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
1530 PALISADE AVENUE CORP., a corporation of the State of
New Jersey, Defendant-Appellant.
H-R PLUMBING, INC., et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents,
v.
1530 PALISADE AVENUE CORP., a corporation of the State of
New Jersey, Defendant-Appellant.
HUDIK-ROSS, INC., a corporation of the State of New Jersey,
Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
H. R. SHAPIRO, INC., a corporation of the State of New
Jersey, Defendant-Appellant.
H. R. SHAPIRO CORPORATION, a corporation of the State of New
Jersey, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
HUDIK-ROSS, INC., a corporation of the State of New Jersey,
Defendant-Respondent.
Herbert W. DAVIS, et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents,
v.
AMERICANA ASSOCIATES, Defendant-Appellant Third-Party Plaintiff,
v.
HUDIK-ROSS, INC., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent.
Bernard BLATT, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
AMERICANA ASSOCIATES, Defendant-Appellant Third-Party Plaintiff,
v.
HUDIK-ROSS, INC., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent.
Larry MANUS, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
AMERICAN ASSOCIATES, Defendant-Appellant.
Superior Court of New Jersey,
Appellate Division.
Argued Oct. 15, 1974.
Decided Nov. 6, 1974.

[329 A.2d 71]

Page 161

Benjamin P. Michel, Newark, for defendants-appellants H. R. Shapiro, Inc. and 1530 Palisade Ave.

Page 162

Corp. (Riker, Danzig, Scherer & Brown, Newark, attorneys).

Theodore W. Geiser, Newark, for plaintiffs-respondents Hudik-Ross, Inc. and H--R Plumbing, Inc. and for defendant-counterclaimant Hudik-Ross, Inc. (McElroy, Connell, Foley & Geiser, Newark, attorneys; Mark L. Fleder, Newark, on the brief).

Daniel M. Hurley, Newark, submitted a statement in lieu of brief for defendant-respondent Hudik-Ross, Inc. (Conway, Reiseman, Michals & Wahl, Newark, attorneys).

Allan Maitlin, Newark, submitted a statement in lieu of brief for plaintiff-appellant H. R. Shapiro, Inc. (Feuerstein, Sachs & Maitlin, Newark, attorneys).

Peter R. Feehan, Hackensack, submitted a statement in lieu of brief for defendant-respondent Hudik-Ross, Inc. (Feehan & Feehan, Hackensack, attorneys).

Daniel A. Fierro, Jr., Fort Lee, submitted a statement in lieu of brief for plaintiffs-respondents Herbert W. Davis and Margaret C. Davis (Fierro, Fierro & Mariniello, Fort Lee, attorneys).

George A. Vaccaro, Paramus, submitted a statement in lieu of brief for defendant-third party plaintiff-appellant Americana Associates (Vaccaro, Osborne & Curran, Paramus, attorneys).

William Goldberg, Hackensack, filed a statement in lieu of brief for plaintiffs-respondents Larry Manus and Bernard Blatt.

Page 161

Before Judges COLLESTER, LORA and HANDLER.

Page 162

The opinion of the court was delivered by

LORA, J.A.D.

This controversy arises out of contracts entered into by plaintiffs-respondents, Hudik-Ross, Inc. and its related corporation, [329 A.2d 72] H--R Plumbing, Inc. (both hereinafter referred to as Hudik-Ross) and defendants-appellants H. R. Shapiro, Inc. and its related corporation, 1530 Palisade

Page 163

Avenue Corp. (both hereinafter referred to as H. S. Shapiro) for construction work to be performed by plaintiffs. On August 6, 1970 H. R. Shapiro entered into a contract with Hudik-Ross under which Hudik-Ross was to provide all the labor and materials for the plumbing work at the Colony Apartment in Fort Lee, New Jersey for $1,460,000.

On November 20, 1970 defendants and plaintiffs entered into a similar contract for the heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC) at the Colony for $1,300,000. On September 8, 1971 the parties contracted for plaintiffs to provide all the plumbing and HVAC work at the site of Regency Towers in Allentown, Pennsylvania for $707,500.

Defendants allege serious disputes arose between the parties over the work on both projects because plaintiffs failed to do work properly and provided inadequate materials for which defendants delivered numerous 'back-changes' to Hudik-Ross, totaling 'at last count' $1,091,573. Plaintiffs assert all work was completed on two contracts by October 9, 1972 and on the third by May 15, 1973; they deny any disputes arose during performance of the work and state no arbitration was demanded while work was in progress.

H. R. Shapiro refused to make the final contract payments and on August 20, 1973 Hudik-Ross instituted three suits against defendants under the three contracts. They claimed $110,500 for the Allentown job, and on the Colony job some $183,393.40 for the HVAC work and.$242,915 for the plumbing work, in all a total of $536,808.40. Defendants answered alleging they refused to pay because of the 'backcharges' in dispute, and by separate affirmative defense set forth their contractual right to go to arbitration.

In October 1973 defendants filed in each of the three separate suits a notice of motion for an order to consolidate the three cases and for an order staying the cases so that the controversies could be submitted to arbitration in accordance with a provision contained in all three contracts. The motion was not granted by the trial judge at that time because a

Page 164

separate written demand for arbitration had not yet been made upon plaintiffs as called for in the arbitration clause. In December 1973 defendants served separate written demands for arbitration on plaintiffs and requested reargument on the motion. On February 6, 1974,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
26 practice notes
  • Singer v. Commodities Corp. (U.S.A.)
    • United States
    • Superior Court of New Jersey
    • July 23, 1996
    ...Barcon Assocs., Inc. v. Tri-County Asphalt Corp., 86 N.J. 179, 186, 430 A.2d 214 (1981); Hudik-Ross, Inc. v. 1530 Palisade Ave. Corp., 131 N.J.Super. 159, 166, 329 A.2d 70 (App.Div.1974); see also Ohio Casualty Ins. Co. v. Benson, 87 N.J. 191, 196, 432 A.2d 905 Indeed, "our courts have long......
  • Barcon Associates, Inc. v. Tri-County Asphalt Corp., TRI-COUNTY
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • May 28, 1981
    ...to the present day and embodied in the current arbitration act, N.J.S.A. 2A:24-1 to -11, Hudik-Ross, Inc. v. 1530 Palisade Ave. Corp., 131 N.J.Super. 159, 166, 329 A.2d 70 The courts of this State have also favored arbitration. E. g., Kearny PBA Local # 21 v. Town of Kearny, 81 N.J. 208, 22......
  • Levine v. Wiss & Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • July 31, 1984
    ...inexpensively, and in a manner that relieves our overburdened judicial resources."); Hudik-Ross, Inc. v. 1530 Palisade Ave. Corp., 131 N.J.Super. 159, 166, 329 A.2d 70 (App.Div.1974); Carpenter v. Bloomer, supra, 54 N.J.Super. 157, 162, 148 A.2d 497. The grant of immunity serves to preserve......
  • Ohio Cas. Ins. Co. v. Benson
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • July 23, 1981
    ...and contracts should be read liberally to find arbitrability if reasonably possible"); Hudik-Ross, Inc. v. 1530 Palisade Ave. Corp., 131 N.J.Super. 159, 166, 329 A.2d 70 (App.Div.1974) (N.J.S.A. 2A:24-1 et seq. reflects strong public policy in favor of arbitration); Keppler v. Terhune, 88 N......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
26 cases
  • Singer v. Commodities Corp. (U.S.A.)
    • United States
    • Superior Court of New Jersey
    • July 23, 1996
    ...Barcon Assocs., Inc. v. Tri-County Asphalt Corp., 86 N.J. 179, 186, 430 A.2d 214 (1981); Hudik-Ross, Inc. v. 1530 Palisade Ave. Corp., 131 N.J.Super. 159, 166, 329 A.2d 70 (App.Div.1974); see also Ohio Casualty Ins. Co. v. Benson, 87 N.J. 191, 196, 432 A.2d 905 Indeed, "our courts have long......
  • Barcon Associates, Inc. v. Tri-County Asphalt Corp., TRI-COUNTY
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • May 28, 1981
    ...to the present day and embodied in the current arbitration act, N.J.S.A. 2A:24-1 to -11, Hudik-Ross, Inc. v. 1530 Palisade Ave. Corp., 131 N.J.Super. 159, 166, 329 A.2d 70 The courts of this State have also favored arbitration. E. g., Kearny PBA Local # 21 v. Town of Kearny, 81 N.J. 208, 22......
  • Levine v. Wiss & Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • July 31, 1984
    ...inexpensively, and in a manner that relieves our overburdened judicial resources."); Hudik-Ross, Inc. v. 1530 Palisade Ave. Corp., 131 N.J.Super. 159, 166, 329 A.2d 70 (App.Div.1974); Carpenter v. Bloomer, supra, 54 N.J.Super. 157, 162, 148 A.2d 497. The grant of immunity serves to preserve......
  • Ohio Cas. Ins. Co. v. Benson
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • July 23, 1981
    ...and contracts should be read liberally to find arbitrability if reasonably possible"); Hudik-Ross, Inc. v. 1530 Palisade Ave. Corp., 131 N.J.Super. 159, 166, 329 A.2d 70 (App.Div.1974) (N.J.S.A. 2A:24-1 et seq. reflects strong public policy in favor of arbitration); Keppler v. Terhune, 88 N......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT