Gary Excavating, Inc. v. North Haven

Pursuant to the provisions of 52-410 of the General Statutes, the plaintiff applied for an order directing the defendants to proceed with the arbitration of alleged disputes concerning the release of moneys held as retainage by the defendants, additional costs incurred through the defendants' misrepresentation of conditions, and extras. The plaintiff claimed that these disputes were arbitrable under the provisions of the contract. While admitting that the claims had been made, the defendants denied that they had refused to comply with the requirements for arbitration and they pleaded specially that the demands for arbitration did not comply with the procedural prerequisites for arbitration and, therefore, the claims were not arbitrable. In addition, the defendants pleaded that one of these claims was barred by the doctrine of res judicata. The court ordered the defendants to proceed with arbitration and the defendants have appealed from the judgment. The conclusions reached by the court appear inconsistent. The court first found that the plaintiff had complied with the contract in presenting claims and had properly demanded arbitration but then concluded that the alleged defenses of the defendant of time limitations, waivers, . . . [and] reasonable time are all issues necessarily involved in the decision of the arbitrators. . . . [W]hether the present disputes are arbitrable is for the arbitrators under the contract. While the memorandum of decision cannot supplant the finding, we may consult the memorandum for a better understanding of the basis of the court's decision. Murphy v. Murphy, 143 Conn. 600, 602, 124 A.2d 891; Murphy v.