Court Opinion

ID: 9964062
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-26 20:09:40.865264+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:25:09.532190
License: Public Domain

WDF Inc. v Mar-Sal Pumbing & Heating Inc.
               2024 NY Slip Op 31438(U)
                      April 22, 2024
           Supreme Court, New York County
        Docket Number: Index No. 653520/2018
                  Judge: Debra A. James
Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip
 Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York
 State and local government sources, including the New
  York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service.
 This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official
                       publication.
                                                                                                                         INDEX NO. 653520/2018
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 116                                                                                              RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/22/2024

                                   SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
                                             NEW YORK COUNTY
            PRESENT:             HON. DEBRA A. JAMES                                                 PART   59
                                                                                      Justice
            ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------X
                                                                                                     INDEX NO.          653520/2018
             WDF INC.,
                                                                                                     MOTION DATE         10/02/2023
                                                         Plaintiff,
                                                                                                     MOTION SEQ. NO.      001 002
                                                 - V -

             MAR-SAL PLUMBING & HEATING INC.,                                                          DECISION + ORDER ON
                                                                                                             MOTION
                                                         Defendants.
            ------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------X

            The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 001) 41, 42, 43, 44, 45,
            46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,83,84, 101,102,103,104,106,108,109,110,111,113
            were read on this motion to/for                                        SUMMARY JUDGMENT (AFTER JOINDER)

            The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 002) 56, 57, 58, 59, 60,
            61, 62, 63, 64,65, 66,67,68,69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79,80, 81, 82, 85,86,87, 88, 89, 90,
            91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 105, 107, 112, 114
            were read on this motion to/for                                                       JUDGMENT-SUMMARY

                                                                            ORDER

                      Upon the foregoing documents, it is

                      ORDERED that the motion of the defendant Mar-Sal Plumbing &

            Heating Inc. for summary judgment dismissing the complaint (causes

            of     action           for       breach          of      contract             and      sounding       in   promissory

            estoppel) is DENIED (motion sequence number 001); and it is further

                      ORDERED that the motion of the plaintiff WDF Inc. for summary

            judgment on its complaint is DENIED (motion sequence number 002);

            and it is further

                      ORDERED that, as the Note of Issue was filed on July 28, 2022

            (NYSCEF Document Number 39),                                   counsel are directed to confer with

             653520/2018 WDF INC. vs. MAR-SAL PLUMBING & HEATING                                                         Page 1 of4
             Motion No. 001 002

[* 1]                                                                       1 of 4
                                                                                             INDEX NO. 653520/2018
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 116                                                                  RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/22/2024

            the Clerk of Trial Assignment Part 40 on the date set for mediation

            and/or trial.

                                                        DECISION

                   In this       action alleging breach of contract and promissory

            estoppel public works construction project, both parties move for

            summary judgment.

                   On September 19,            2013,    defendant Mar-Sal Plumbing & Heating

            Inc.    ("Mar-Sal"), a plumbing and heating subcontractor, submitted

            to plaintiff WDF Inc.             ("WDF"), as the prime contractor, a proposal

            for plumbing work in connection with WDF's bid on a project of

            non-party Dormitory Authority of the State of New York.                              (NYSCEF

            Document Number 45).

                   On December 20, 2013, WDF was awarded the project by the non-

            party Dormitory Authority of the State of New York,                           but Mar-Sal

            did not      commence       the    plumbing work        despite    attending       the    pre-

            construction kickoff meeting. WDF asserts that it was ultimately

            forced to complete the plumbing work without Mar-Sal and alleges

            that as a result of Mar-Sal's breach of the plumbing subcontract,

            it incurred significantly greater cost in carrying out its contract

            with the Dormitory Authority.

                   Mar-Sal argues that it did not commence the work because WDF

            provided       additional         drawings       that   expanded     the   scope     of        the

            plumbing work beyond what was initially proposed by Mar-Sal.                                   WDF

            contends       that      the    additional         drawings   were     merely      detailed

             653520/2018 WDF INC. vs. MAR-SAL PLUMBING & HEATING                             Page 2 of 4
             Motion No. 001 002

[* 2]                                                      2 of 4
                                                                                         INDEX NO. 653520/2018
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 116                                                             RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/22/2024

            specifications for the work,                  which had been already proposed by

           Mar-Sal, and that the additional drawings did not expand the scope

            of work.       WDF also submits the letter to Joseph Krajczewksi, WDF

            vice president of operations, dated May 12, 2014,                     signed by Mar-

            Sal president Salvatore Marullo, which states

                           "Unfortunately Mar-Sal Plumbing & Heating Inc. cannot
                           proceed with this project.    We discovered there where
                           (sic) many mistakes done with the pricing of this project
                           and our previous estimator under priced it, we are truly
                           sorry for any inconvenience this may caused (sic) your
                           company but for this reason we choose to pull back from
                           this agreement."

                      It is undisputed that there was no signed written contract

            between the parties.

                      However, there are issues of fact whether Mar-Sal's

            attendance at a pre-construction kick off meeting and

            participation in the vetting process were "unequivocally

            referable" to the unsigned construction agreement to perform the

            plumbing work, which              partial performance would remove same from

            the purview of the statute of frauds.                    See HPP Ice Rink,     Inc v

            New York Islanders, 251 Ad2d 249 (l3t Dept 1998).

                   Moreover, as with the Letter of Intent that was the subject

            of the opinion of the First Department, Appellate Division in

            Bed   &    Beyond Inc v IBEX Constr, LLC,               (52 AD3d 413, 414 [l3t Dept

            2008]), the statement that "A formal contract will be forwarded

            shortly", in the Letter of Intent that WDF sent to Mar-Sal, does

             653520/2018 WDF INC. vs. MAR-SAL PLUMBING & HEATING                         Page 3 of 4
             Motion No. 001 002

[* 3]                                                      3 of 4
                                                                                                             INDEX NO. 653520/2018
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 116                                                                             RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/22/2024

            not amount to an express reservation of rights.                                   Nonetheless,

            as this court finds there is an ambiguity as to the scope of

            work thereunder, there remains a question of fact as to the

            terms of such binding agreement.                       See Blume v Jacobwitz, 212

            AD3d 403 (1 st Dept 2023)

                    In addition, there are numerous triable issues on the claim

            sounding in promissory estoppel, as to whether Mar-Sal "'made a

            clear and unambiguous promise, upon which [plaintiff] reasonably

            relied, to its detriment'" (Bunkoff Gen Contrs v Dunham Elec,

            300 AD2d 976, 978 [3d Dept 2002]).

                    As to the claim for damages, WDF does not come forward with

            evidence that establishes the extent that Mar-Sal's                                            failure           to

            complete the plumbing work in accordance with its bid proposal

            decreased WDF' s          return under its                contract with non-party owner

            Dormitory Authority, and therefore no summary monetary judgment is

            warranted.          See Spilman v Matyas, 212 AD3d 859, 860 (2d Dept 2023)

                                                                            P-~ fl - } ~
                                                                          20240422154508DJAMES18861050F53341299684A194A479E21D

                    4/22/2024
                      DATE                                                         DEBRA A. JAMES, J.S.C.

                                     ~
             CHECK ONE:                  CASE DISPOSED                    NON-FINAL DISPOSITION

                                         GRANTED         0    DENIED      GRANTED IN PART                  □ OTHER
             APPLICATION:                SETTLE ORDER                     SUBMIT ORDER

             CHECK IF APPROPRIATE:       INCLUDES TRANSFER/REASSIGN       FIDUCIARY APPOINTMENT            □ REFERENCE

             653520/2018 WDF INC. vs. MAR-SAL PLUMBING & HEATING                                              Page4 of 4
             Motion No. 001 002

[* 4]                                                        4 of 4