Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Zimmcor (1993) Inc v. Permasteelisa North America Corp

March 30, 2012

ZIMMCOR (1993) INC., PLAINTIFF,
v.
PERMASTEELISA NORTH AMERICA CORP., DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Mae A. D'Agostino, U.S. District Judge:

MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER

I. INTRODUCTION

On September 28, 2010, Plaintiff commenced the instant breach of contract action. See Dkt. No. 1. On December 16, 2010, Defendant Permasteelisa North America Corp. ("Permasteelisa") filed its answer and a counterclaim against Plaintiff. See Dkt. No. 5. On December 30, 2010, Defendant Permasteelisa filed a third-party complaint against Turner Construction Company ("Turner"). See Dkt. No. 6.*fn1

Currently before the Court is Defendant Permasteelisa's motion for summary judgment as to Plaintiff's first cause of action. See Dkt. No. 21.

II. BACKGROUND

A. The parties and relevant background information

This lawsuit arises out of a construction project at the campus of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute ("RPI"), in Troy, New York, for the construction of the Experimental Media Performing Arts Center (hereinafter the "Project"). On or about July 30, 2004, RPI entered into a contract with Turner, whereby Turner was to serve as the construction manager for the Project (the "Primary Contract").

Turner entered into a subcontract with Josef Gartner USA ("Gartner") -- a division of Defendant Permasteelisa -- whereby Gartner was to perform a portion of the work at the Project for Turner (hereinafter the "Primary Subcontract"). On June 21, 2005, Plaintiff and Defendant Permasteelisa, through Gartner, executed a "Secondary Subcontract." See Dkt. No. 21-10. Pursuant to the Secondary Subcontract, Plaintiff was to perform the design, procurement, fabrication, assembly, testing, supply, distribution, erection and installation of a portion of the "Curtain Wall System" that Defendant Permasteelisa had subcontracted with Turner to construct.

After execution of the Secondary Subcontract, Plaintiff's Vice President, Akiva Markus, served as Plaintiff's project manager for the Project. As Plaintiff's project manager, Mr. Markus was responsible for overseeing the management of Plaintiff's work, including the design of the curtain walls, the manufacturing of the components at Plaintiff's facility, the delivery of the components to the Project site, installation at the Project site, and payment from Gartner for the work performed. See Dkt. No. 28-9 at 4.*fn2

As part of monitoring the work performed, Mr. Markus determined if the work that was performed or proposed to be performed by Plaintiff was additional or extra work beyond what Plaintiff was required to perform under the Secondary Subcontract. See id. When extra or additional work was required, Mr. Markus would submit a request for a change order to Joseph Tizn of Gartner. See id. Mr. Markus and Mr. Tizn would then negotiate the work and its cost; and, if they were able to reach an agreement, Mr. Tizn would prepare a change order using Turner's Subcontract Change Order form.

Between March 27, 2006, and continuing through March 9, 2011, Mr. Tizn prepared and issued thirty-two Subcontract Change Orders. See Dkt. No. 28-1 at 1.*fn3 With the exception of Subcontract Change Order No. 15, all of the Subcontract Change Orders use Turner's form, which sets forth a description of the extra or additional work to be performed or the work to be deleted from the Secondary Subcontract and the cost thereof to be added to or deducted from the Secondary Subcontract price. See generally Dkt. No. 28-1.

B. Applicable contract provisions

The Secondary Subcontract incorporates by reference the provisions of the Primary Subcontract. The Secondary Subcontract provides as follows: "The intention of this Secondary Sub Contract is to pass down relevant obligations and entitlements from the Primary Subcontract into the Secondary Sub Contract[.]" See Dkt. No. 21-10 at 2. The Secondary Subcontract also provides, in relevant part, that "[t]he terms and conditions of the Primary Subcontract as defined and listed in Appendix B, together with any other documents listed in Appendix B, are deemed to be incorporated into and form part of this Secondary Sub Contract. The Secondary Sub Contract shall consist of this document together with any documents listed in Appendix B." See id. at 4.

Appendix B to the Secondary Subcontract lists, among other documents, the Primary Subcontract. See id. at 7. Article V of the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.