From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

College Plaza, Inc. v. Harlaco, Inc.

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Jan 26, 1965
152 Conn. 707 (Conn. 1965)

Summary

In College Plaza, Inc. v. Harlaco, Inc., 152 Conn. 707, 206 A.2d 832 (1965), our Supreme Court confronted the issue of whether the question of arbitrability was for an arbitrator or the court.

Summary of this case from Montowese Ind. v. Thomas E. Gol. Rea.

Opinion

Argued December 2, 1964

Decided January 26, 1965

Application for an order directing the defendant to proceed with arbitration, brought to the Superior Court in New Haven County and tried to the court, Thim, J.; judgment for the plaintiff and appeal by the defendant. No error.

Thomas D. Clifford, for the appellant (defendant).

Morton J. Dimenstein, with whom were William M. Vishno and, on the brief, Cornell M. Lattanzi, for the appellee (plaintiff).


The defendant, which constructed a shopping center for the plaintiff, has appealed from a judgment directing it to proceed with the arbitration of a dispute which arose when water damage occurred, allegedly from faulty construction. The defendant contends that the plaintiff is not entitled to arbitration since the contract required that the plaintiff first obtain a ruling by the architect and also that the claim be presented within a year from the completion of the work. The court ruled that these were questions to be determined by the arbitrators and not by it.

Whether the arbitrability of a dispute is a question for the court or for the arbitrators depends upon the language of the contract. The agreement in the present case provided that "[a]ny disagreement arising out of this contract or from the breach thereof shall be submitted to arbitration". We have consistently held that under such broad and all-embracing language the question of what is subject to arbitration is for the arbitrators themselves. Gores v. Rosenthal, 150 Conn. 554, 557, 192 A.2d 210; Connecticut Union of Telephone Workers, Inc. v. Southern New England Telephone Co., 148 Conn. 192, 196, 198, 169 A.2d 646; International Brotherhood v. Trudon Platt Motor Lines, Inc., 146 Conn. 17, 21, 147 A.2d 484; Liggett v. Torrington Building Co., 114 Conn. 425, 430, 158 A. 917.


Summaries of

College Plaza, Inc. v. Harlaco, Inc.

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Jan 26, 1965
152 Conn. 707 (Conn. 1965)

In College Plaza, Inc. v. Harlaco, Inc., 152 Conn. 707, 206 A.2d 832 (1965), our Supreme Court confronted the issue of whether the question of arbitrability was for an arbitrator or the court.

Summary of this case from Montowese Ind. v. Thomas E. Gol. Rea.
Case details for

College Plaza, Inc. v. Harlaco, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:COLLEGE PLAZA, INC. v. HARLACO, INC

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut

Date published: Jan 26, 1965

Citations

152 Conn. 707 (Conn. 1965)
206 A.2d 832

Citing Cases

Seymour Board of Ed. v. Seymour Educ.

This conclusion is dictated by controlling precedent. East Hartford v. East Hartford Municipal Employees…

Montowese Ind. v. Thomas E. Gol. Rea.

A review of the relevant authority reveals a pattern by our Supreme Court to construe broad language in an…