Case Name: L&L Painting Co., Inc., et al., Appellants, v. Contract Dispute Resolution Board of the City of New York et al., Respondents
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2010-04-29
Citations: 14 N.Y.3d 827
Docket Number: 
Parties: L&L Painting Co., Inc., et al., Appellants, v Contract Dispute Resolution Board of the City of New York et al., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 14
Pages: 827–828

Head Matter:
[926 NE2d 1228, 900 NYS2d 723]
L&L Painting Co., Inc., et al., Appellants, v Contract Dispute Resolution Board of the City of New York et al., Respondents.
Decided April 29, 2010
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Georgoulis & Associates PLLC, New York City (Michael McDermott of counsel), for appellants.
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York City (Alan G. Krams of counsel), for respondents.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs. The City of New York Contract Dispute Resolution Board rationally determined that a discrepancy between a diagram and notes on the contract drawing that is the subject of this dispute created an ambiguity in the contract terms, which petitioner L&L Painting Co., Inc. failed to clarify prior to bidding as the contract required. Therefore, the Board rationally disapproved the claim for additional compensation.
Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.