HomeMy WebLinkAbout99-6179 civilLARUE T. HOFFMAN, III,
Plaintiff
VS.
PYRAMID CONSTRUCTION
SERVICES, INC.,
Defendant
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
99-6179 CIVIL
CIVIL ACTION- LAW
IN RE: DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS
BEFORE BAYLEY AND HESS, JJ,.
ORDER
AND NOW, this
day of June, 2000, the preliminary objection of the defendant
asserting a prior agreement to arbitrate is SUSTAINED and the complaint herein filed is
DISMISSED.
BY THE COURT,
David J. Lenox, Esquire
For the Plaintiff
Hess, .
·
Diane M. Tokarsky, Esquire
For the Defendant
:rlm
LARUE T. HOFFMAN, III,
Plaintiff
VS.
PYRAMID CONSTRUCTION
SERVICES, INC.,
Defendant
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
99-6179 CIVIL
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
IN RE: DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS
BEFORE BAYLEY AND HESS, JJ..
OPINION AND ORDER
The defendant in this case has filed a preliminary objection to the complaint seeking
dismissal because of an agreement to arbitrate. According to the complaint, on June 16, 1998,
the parties entered into a written contract for interior painting at a commercial building project
on the Walnut Bottom Road in Shippensburg. The plaintiff contends that, through no fault of his
own, he was prevented from completing the contract. He has brought an action for damages
resulting from the breach.
Of the twenty-two articles in the contract, one provides as follows'
Article 18. LEGAL FORUM. Any dispute as to
the operation, fulfillment of meaning of this
Subcontract or the execution or breach thereof,
may be resolved either by arbitration or by action
at law, at the sole option of the Contractor. If the
Contractor shall determine, in its sole discretion, to
resolve the dispute between the parties by
arbitration, such should be in accordance with the
then prevailing rules, regulations and procedures
for arbitration as established and administered by
the American Arbitration Association and an
award pursuant to such arbitration shall be final
and binding on both parties. Any award rendered
by arbitrators and any appeal therefrom shall be
governed by the Pennsylvania Statutory Arbitration
99-6179 CIVIL
Law, 42 Pa.C.S.A. Section 7301, Chapter A. If the
Contractor shall determine, in its sole discretion,
that an action at law shall be commenced, such
action shall be brought in the Court of Common
Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. In
either forum, Pennsylvania law shall be applied.
Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1028(a)(6) expressly provides that preliminary
objections may be filed asserting a prior agreement for alternative dispute resolution. Our courts
have made it clear that preliminary objections may be used to invoke the process of arbitration.
See Goral v. Fox Ridge, Inc.., 453 Pa. Super. 316, 323,683 A.2d 931,934 (1996).
Arbitration is a favored method of dispute resolution in this Commonwealth. See
Waddell v. Shriber, 465 Pa. 20, 27, 348 A.2d 96, 99 (1975). The court must decide whether a
dispute should be resolved through litigation or by arbitration. See id._.:. The dispute shall be
resolved by arbitration if it falls within a contractual arbitration provision. See Wolf v.
Baltimore, 250 Pa. Super. 230, 234, 378 A.2d 911,912 (1977); see also Waddell, 348 A.2d at
100. To determine this, the court must review the contractual language and decide whether the
dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration provision. See Shadduck v. Kaclik, Inc., 713
A.2d 635, 635 (Pa. Super. 1998).
In Shadduck v. Kaclik, Inc.., the Court held that all claims arising out of construction
contract, or the breach thereof, were subject to a mandatory arbitration provision because of the
provision's expansive terms and the absence of limiting language. See id. at 635. The provision
in the contract required that all disputes be submitted to the American Arbitration Association for
final, binding arbitration. See id. at 636. The Court held that the dispute should be submitted for
compulsory arbitration consistent with the agreement of the parties. See id. at 639.
99-6179 CIVIL
Similarly, in Shamokin Area School Authority v. Farfield Co., the contract between the
parties provided that "all claims, disputes and other matters in question arising out of, or relating
to, this Contract or the breach thereof.., shall be decided by arbitration in accordance with the
Construction Industry Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association then obtaining
unless the parties agree otherwise." See Shamokin Area School Authority v. Farfield Co., 308
Pa. Super. 271,273,454 A.2d 126, 127 (1982). The Court held that arbitration should be
compelled. See id. at 129. In Waddell v. Shriber, the Court held that by subscribing to the New
York Stock Exchange Constitution, the parties created a contractual obligation to resolve any
disputes through arbitration. See Waddel[, 348 A.2d at 100.
In this case, the contract provided for arbitration of any "dispute as to the operation,
fulfillment or meaning of the Subcontract or the execution or breach thereof." It is difficult to
imagine language more expansive that that. We have, therefore, no hesitation in reaching the
conclusion that this dispute is subject to arbitration at the option of the defendant and will,
accordingly, sustain the defendant's preliminary .objection.
ORDER
AND NOW, this /g-~ day of June, 2000, the preliminary objection of the defendant
asserting a prior agreement to arbitrate is SUSTAINED and the complaint herein filed is
DISMISSED.
BY THE COURT,
ess, J.
99-6179 CIVIL
David J. Lenox, Esquire
For the Plaintiff
Diane M. Tokarsky, Esquire
For the Defendant
:rlm