Shopping Cart (0) items Sign In

Construction Claims Monthly - Devoted exclusively to the problems of construction contracting since 1963

‹ Prev article: 
 

WHERE PARTIES ACT LIKE THERE IS A CONTRACT, THERE USUALLY IS

Thursday, November 15, 2012 02:44 am

 

Contracts -- Arbitration

Jatsek Construction Co., Inc. v. Burton Scot Contractors, LLC, et al, 2012 Ohio App. Lexis 3489 (Aug. 30, 2012)

Though both parties' signatures did not appear on a subcontract, the agreement's provisions--including the one that required arbitration--did bind the parties.

Subcontractor Jatsek Construction Co., Inc. (Jatsek) alleged that general contractor Burton Scot Contractors, LLC (Burton Scot) failed to pay Jatsek for work it performed on a public improvements project in Warren, Ohio. Burton Scot acknowledged that it had not paid the sub, but it argued that the subcontract required mandatory and binding arbitration on the matter. Jatsek argued that the parties had never formed a contract and therefore never agreed to arbitrate. A trial court confirmed that no contract existed for the project, but an appellate court disagreed.

There was a lapse in time between Jatsek's bid submittal and Burton[...]

 
› Next article: 
 
Sign up now for Construction Claims Monthly Online! Your own virtual help desk of must-have techniques, tutorials, and how-to articles.
 
Join Now Construction Claims Monthly! Close