Peacock Construction Co. v. Modern Air Conditioning, Inc.
Defendant was building a condominium project and subcontracted plaintiffs to do the heating and air conditioning and the rooftop swimming pool. The subcontracts said defendant would pay plaintiffs within 30 days of being paid by the owner. The owner then did not pay defendant so defendant did not pay plaintiff.
Trial court granted summary judgment to plaintiffs, implicitly interpreting the contract to not require payment by the owner as a condition precedent to defendant paying plaintiffs. The Court of Appeal affirmed, saying that this was not a provision to tell if the subcontractor got paid but when the subcontractor got paid.
Was the owner paying a condition precedent to the subcontractor getting paid?
See:R2C § 227
It would not be expected that the small subcontractor bears the risk when it is not expressly said that it does.
No, it was not a condition precedent.