Case Name: Benjamin Shapiro, Doing Business under the Name of Aaborn Company, Appellant, v. George F. Driscoll Company, Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1943-06-04
Citations: 266 A.D. 260
Docket Number: 
Parties: Benjamin Shapiro, Doing Business under the Name of Aaborn Company, Appellant, v. George F. Driscoll Company, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 266
Pages: 260–263

Head Matter:
Benjamin Shapiro, Doing Business under the Name of Aaborn Company, Appellant, v. George F. Driscoll Company, Respondent.
First Department,
June 4, 1943.
Harry Becker of counsel (Harold M. Steinmetz, attorney), for appellant.
Walter Jeffreys Carlin for respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.-
The terms and specifications of the contract were so clear as to make it impossible as matter of law to claim that they contained an ambiguity which would justify submitting that question to a jury. Since there was no ambiguity in the contract, the conversations between the subcontractor and the architects raise no issue which should have been further litigated.
The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.