Southern New England Contracting Co. v. Norwich Roman Catholic Diocesan Corp.

Decision Date23 May 1978
Citation397 A.2d 108,175 Conn. 197
PartiesSOUTHERN NEW ENGLAND CONTRACTING COMPANY v. NORWICH ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESAN CORPORATION.
CourtConnecticut Supreme Court

Richard L. Barger, Hartford, for appellant (plaintiff).

Jackson T. King, Jr., Norwich, for appellee (defendant).

Before COTTER, LOISELLE, BOGDANSKI, LONGO and HEALEY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff brought this action in the Superior Court in Hartford County seeking interest allegedly due on an arbitration award. On that issue the court found in favor of the defendant, and from its judgment the plaintiff has appealed.

The facts, as stipulated to by the parties and found by the court, are as follows: On April 4, 1966, the parties entered into a contract whereby the plaintiff agreed to construct certain educational and housing facilities for the defendant. During the course of construction, various disputes arose between the parties and on March 18, 1969, the plaintiff submitted a demand for arbitration in accordance with the contract. On May 19, 1970, the arbitrators awarded the plaintiff $158,331.43. The defendant filed a motion to vacate the award, and, subsequently, the plaintiff filed an application to have the award confirmed.

By agreement, the award was resubmitted to the arbitrators with direction that it be broken down into more detailed figures, the parties agreeing that the effective date of the award would continue to be May 19, 1970. Once the award was itemized, the matter was referred to a state referee who, exercising the powers of the Superior Court, rendered judgment on July 16, 1971, confirming the award. The defendant appealed and, on March 23, 1973, that judgment was affirmed. Norwich Roman Catholic Diocesan Corporation v. Southern New England Contracting Co., 164 Conn. 472, 325 A.2d 274.

On May 11, 1973, the defendant paid the principal of the judgment plus interest from the date of the referee's judgment confirming the award. The defendant did not pay any interest on the principal from May 19, 1970, the date of the arbitrators' award, to July 16, 1971, the date of the Superior Court judgment. The plaintiff brought this action to recover interest for this and from a judgment in favor of the defendant he has appealed.

The plaintiff's claim is based upon a provision of the contract, which is comprised of the American Institute of Architects document forms A101 and A201, and the specifications and drawings. Article 25 of the general conditions of the contract provides, in part: "Should the Owner fail to pay the sum named . . . in any award by arbitration, Upon demand when due, the Contractor shall receive . . . interest thereon at the legal rate." (Emphasis added.) The plaintiff contends that under the specific terms of this provision the sum named in the award became "due" as of the date of the award, and that the plaintiff's application to confirm the award constituted sufficient "demand," or, alternatively, that, because the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Gino's Pizza of East Hartford, Inc. v. Kaplan
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • May 8, 1984
    ...intention conveyed is clear and unambiguous, there is no room for construction." Southern New England Contracting Co. v. Norwich Roman Catholic Diocesan Corporation, 175 Conn. 197, 199, 397 A.2d 108 (1978). The lease clearly restricts Camarco to operating only a bakery, which by no stretch ......
  • Gertrude L.Q. v. Stephen P.Q.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Delaware
    • June 27, 1983
    ...City of Augusta v. Quirion, Me.Supr., 436 A.2d 388, 392 (1981) (paving contract); Southern New England Contracting Co. v. Norwich Roman Catholic Dioceasan Corp., 175 Conn. 197, 397 A.2d 108, 109 (1978) (construction contract arbitration In this action, the agreement between the husband and ......
  • Murphy, Inc. v. Remodeling, Etc., Inc.
    • United States
    • Connecticut Court of Appeals
    • March 27, 2001
    ...[in a written contract] is clear and unambiguous, there is no room for construction." Southern New England Contracting Co. v. Norwich Roman Catholic Diocesan Corp., 175 Conn. 197, 199, 397 A.2d 108 (1978). "Extrinsic evidence is admissible to assist the court in resolving the question of in......
  • Filakosky v. Valente
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • May 23, 1978
  • 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