{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman;}
{\f36\fnil\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 00000400000000000000}WP TypographicSymbols{\*\falt Courier New};}{\f172\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE;}{\f173\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr;}
{\f175\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek;}{\f176\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur;}{\f177\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew);}{\f178\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic);}
{\f179\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic;}{\f180\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese);}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255;\red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255;
\red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0;\red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;}
{\stylesheet{\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden Default Paragraph Font;}{\*
\ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv 
\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{\*\cs15 \additive \sbasedon10 \ssemihidden footnote reference;}{
\s16\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext16 \styrsid12671197 header;}{\s17\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext17 \styrsid12671197 footer;}}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid2557687\rsid4156459\rsid9508377\rsid9923608\rsid10966702\rsid12671197}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 10.0.6764;}{\info
{\title IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM}{\author lroberto}{\operator blake_r}{\creatim\yr2005\mo8\dy12\hr9\min4}{\revtim\yr2006\mo3\dy10\hr10\min32}{\version5}{\edmins4}{\nofpages12}{\nofwords4907}{\nofchars27972}{\*\company Superior Court of Guam}
{\nofcharsws32814}{\vern16391}}\margl1440\margr1440\margb1080 \widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\notabind\wraptrsp\transmf\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\truncatefontheight\subfontbysize\sprsbsp\wpjst\lytprtmet\hyphcaps0\horzdoc\dghspace120
\dgvspace120\dghorigin1701\dgvorigin1984\dghshow0\dgvshow3\jcompress\viewkind4\viewscale100\nolnhtadjtbl\rsidroot2557687 \fet0{\*\ftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {
\insrsid2557687 \chftnsep 
\par }}{\*\ftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid2557687 \chftnsepc 
\par }}{\*\aftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid2557687 \chftnsep 
\par }}{\*\aftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid2557687 \chftnsepc 
\par }}\sectd \linex0\headery1440\footery1080\sectdefaultcl\sectrsid2557687\sftnbj {\header \pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\tx-720\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\i\fs20\insrsid2557687 Brown v. Dillingham Const.}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 , Opinion\tab \tab Page }{\field{\*\fldinst {\fs20\insrsid2557687 PAGE }}{\fldrslt {
\fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid9923608 1}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687  of 16
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid2557687 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\sl-9\slmult0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid9923608 
{\shp{\*\shpinst\shpleft1440\shptop0\shpright10800\shpbottom9\shpfhdr1\shpbxpage\shpbxignore\shpbypara\shpbyignore\shpwr3\shpwrk0\shpfblwtxt1\shpz0\shplockanchor\shplid2049{\sp{\sn shapeType}{\sv 1}}{\sp{\sn fFlipH}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fFlipV}{\sv 0}}
{\sp{\sn fillColor}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fillBackColor}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fFilled}{\sv 1}}{\sp{\sn lineWidth}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fLine}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fShadow}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn posrelh}{\sv 1}}{\sp{\sn fLayoutInCell}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fBehindDocument}{\sv 1}}
{\sp{\sn fLayoutInCell}{\sv 0}}}{\shprslt{\*\do\dobxpage\dobypara\dodhgt0\dprect\dpx1440\dpy0\dpxsize9360\dpysize9\dpfillfgcr0\dpfillfgcg0\dpfillfgcb0\dpfillbgcr0\dpfillbgcg0\dpfillbgcb0\dpfillpat1\dplinehollow}}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\sl-240\slmult0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid2557687 
\par }}{\*\pnseclvl1\pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2\pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}}
{\*\pnseclvl5\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8
\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM}{\b\insrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9923608 {\insrsid4156459\charrsid9923608 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 OVITA CRUZ BROWN, as personal representative of the estate of Kenneth Walter Gogue, and as guardian of her minor child, DYLLIN JAY
 CRUZ GOGUE, MICHAEL D. LANGDON, MICHELLE LANGDON, AND CIRCLE }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 A}{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  EXCAVATION CO.,}{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Plaintiffs-Appellees,}{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 vs.}{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 DILLINGHAM CONSTRUCTION PACIFIC BASIN LTD., }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Defendant-Appellant.}{\insrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 OPINION}{\insrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Supreme Court Case No.: CVA02-004 
\par Superior Court Case No.: CV1792-00}{\insrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Filed:}{\b\insrsid4156459  }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 January 8, 2003}{\insrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Cite as:}{\b\insrsid4156459  }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 2003 Guam 2}{\insrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Appeal from the Superior Court of Guam
\par Argued and submitted on September 3, 2002
\par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }\trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts11\trqc\trgaph120\trleft-120\trftsWidth1\trpaddl120\trpaddr120\trpaddfl3\trpaddfr3 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw15\brdrcf1 \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw15\brdrcf1 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw15\brdrcf1 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw15\brdrcf1 
\cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx4560\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw15\brdrcf1 \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw15\brdrcf1 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw15\brdrcf1 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw15\brdrcf1 \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx9240\pard 
\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\faauto\rin0\lin0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }{\ul\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Appearing for Plaintiffs-Appellees}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 :
\par Cesar C. Cabot, Esq.
\par Law Office of Cesar C. Cabot
\par BankPacific Bldg., Second Flr.
\par 825 S. Marine Dr.
\par Tamuning, GU 96913}{\insrsid4156459 
\par 
\par }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Michael Cullen, Esq.
\par Olsen & Associates
\par 11314-4th Ave. W., Suite 111
\par Everett, WA 98204\cell 
\par }{\ul\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Appearing for Defendant-Appellant}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 :
\par Kevin Fowler, Esq.
\par Dooley Lannen Roberts & Fowler LLP
\par Suite 201, Orlean Pacific Plaza
\par 865 S. Marine Dr.
\par Tamuning, GU 96913
\par \cell }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts11\trqc\trgaph120\trleft-120\trftsWidth1\trpaddl120\trpaddr120\trpaddfl3\trpaddfr3 \clvertalt
\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw15\brdrcf1 \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw15\brdrcf1 \clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw15\brdrcf1 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw15\brdrcf1 \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx4560\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrs\brdrw15\brdrcf1 \clbrdrl\brdrs\brdrw15\brdrcf1 
\clbrdrb\brdrs\brdrw15\brdrcf1 \clbrdrr\brdrs\brdrw15\brdrcf1 \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx9240\row }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid4156459 
\par }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 BEFORE:}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 PETER C. SIGUENZA, JR., Chief Justice; F. PHILIP CARBULLIDO, Associate Justice; FRANCES M. TYDINGCO-GATEWOOD, Associate Justice.}{\insrsid4156459 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 CARBULLIDO, J.:}{\b\insrsid2557687 
\par }{\insrsid4156459\charrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [1]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab Defendant-Appellant Dillingham Construction Pacific Basin Ltd. (hereinafter }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Dillingham}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
) seeks an interlocutory review of the trial court}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s partial summary judgment in favor of Plaintiff-Appellee }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  Excavation Co. (hereinafter }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 ).}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 The trial court held that Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s claims were not barred by either the contractual limitation period clause or the agreement to arbitrate clause.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 We grant interlocutory review and reverse the trial court}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s decision.
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 I.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [2]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab Dillingham was the General Contractor for the construction of the Micronesia Mall Expansion Phase II project and was }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 responsible for all aspects of excavation, installation and erection of the large cement structure.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Appellant}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s Excerpts of Record, p. 3 (Complaint, October 27, 2000).}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 On September 4, 1997, Dillingham executed an Agreement of Subcontract (hereinafter }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Subcontract}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 ) valued at $1,839,783.00 with Circle A, a Guam corporation owned by Plaintiff-Appellees Michael and Michelle Langdon.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Circle A}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s main responsibility under the Subcontract was }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 for the excavation of soil and other materials underneath large, pre-fabricated cement beams and the structures being erected by}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  Dillingham.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
The General Conditions of the Agreement of Subcontract (hereinafter }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 General Conditions}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 ) contained several standard form clauses, including an indemnity clause, an arbitration clause,}{
\insrsid4156459  and a time limitations clause.}{\insrsid2557687 
\par }{\insrsid4156459\charrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [3]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab This case arises out of an incident, which occurred on October 29, 1998, when a Circle A employee, Kenneth Walter Gogue (hereinafter }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Gogue}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 ), was fatally injured while working around and underneath the cement structure built by Dillingham.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Circle A alleged that the accident was a result of Dillingham}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s improper installation of a double tee beam, which was approximately thirty feet in length and placed across the vertical structures and the angle irons that were used to support the structure.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
As a result of the unstable and incorrectly supported structure, the beam collapsed.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 In addition to Gogue}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s death, the accident also damaged several pieces of Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s equipment, including the following: a PC-220 excavator, a 555D backhoe, and a soil impounder. 
\par }{\b\insrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [4]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab On October 27, 2000, a multi-plaintiff suit against Dillingham was filed.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
The suit was filed approximately two years after the accident and over one year after the project was substantially completed on June 30, 1999.}{\cs15\super\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain 
\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid2557687 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid2557687 
 The parties do not dispute the date of substantial completion.  Pursuant to section 1.1 of the General Conditions, substantial completion is defined as:
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid2557687 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid2557687 Substantial Completion of the Project as def
ined in the Prime Contract, or if not defined therein, then the stage in the progress of the work required of Contractor under the Prime Contract when such work is sufficiently complete in accordance with the Contract Documents so the Owner can occupy and
 utilize such work for its intended purpose.  
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid2557687 
\par Appellant}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 
s Excerpts of Record, p. 26 (General Conditions).  In addition to the substantial completion date of June 30, 1999, the Certificate of Occupancy was issued on July 19, 1999.  Appellants Excerpts of Record, p. 19 (Certificate of Occupancy).
\par }}}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Appellant}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s Excerpts of Record, pp. 17-18 (Robertson Decl. }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  4 and Ex. A).}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 The Complaint contained the following four claims for relief: (1) Negligence Against the Defendant; (2) Gross and/or Intentional Negligence; (3) Negligence of the Defendant; and, (4) Breach of Contract.}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Essentially, the Complaint can be bifurcated into two parts.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 The first part of the Complaint, or the first and second claims for relief, concerns Plaintiff Ovita Brown}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s (hereinafter }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Brown}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
) wrongful death action against Dillingham.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Brown, as Gogue}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s alleged putative spouse, and guardian of their minor child, Dyllin Jay Cruz Gogue, sued as personal representative of Gogue}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s estate.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 The second part of the Complaint, which is the matter before this court, involves the third and fourth claims, namely, Circle A}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s breach of contract and negligence claims 
for equipment damages and other losses stemming from the accident.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [5]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab On December 15, 2000, Dillingham filed a Motion for Summary Judgment addressing all four claims for relief.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
On January 7, 2002, the trial court issued a Decision and Order, which, in effect, granted Dillingham}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s summary judgment motion against Brown with respect to the first and second claims for relief, but denied Dillingham}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s summary judgment motion against Circle A with regard to the third and forth claims for relief.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Specifically, the trial court held that }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Brown [was] not entitled to recover under the wrongful death act because she [was] not an heir or putative spouse under Guam law,}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  and that }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 the wrongful death claims of Brown and Dyllin are barred by the exclusive remedy provision of the worker}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s compensation act.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Appellant}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s Excerpts of Record, p. 41 (Decision and Order, January 7, 2002).}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 However, the trial court held that Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s claims were not barred by either the }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
the contractual limitation period under the [S]ubcontract [or] by its agreement to arbitrate all disputes arising out of that [S]ubcontract.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Appellant}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s Excerpts of Record, p. 42 (Decision and Order, January 7, 2002).}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Pursuant to Rule 4(a) of the Guam Rules of Appellate Procedure (hereinafter }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 GRAP}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
), Dillingham timely filed an interlocutory appeal on January 30, 2002 appealing that part of the trial court}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s Decision and Order, which held that Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s claims were not barred by either the contractual limitation period or the agreement to arbitrate clause.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 II.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [6]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
The standard of review in an interlocutory appeal generally is whether the . . . [trial] court abused its discretion in granting or denying the requested relief.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Feldheim v. Sims}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 760 N.E.2d 123, 129 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001); }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Schroeder Murchie Laya Assocs.}{
\i\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 v. 1000 West Lofts, LLC}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 746 N.E.2d 294, 297 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001).}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 We review contract construction }{
\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 de novo.}{\i\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 See Apana v. Rosario}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 2000 Guam 7, }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 9 (citations omitted).}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 In interpreting a contract, the language governs if clear and explicit and [does] not involv[e] [an] absurdity.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Ronquillo v. Korea Auto., Fire, & Marine Ins. Co.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 2001 Guam 25, }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  10 (citing Title 18 GCA }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  87104 (1992)).}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 III.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 A.}{\b\insrsid4156459  }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Jurisdiction}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [7]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab Before discussing the substan
tive issues presented by the parties in this appeal, we are initially called upon to address the threshold matter of whether this court should exercise its discretion and conduct an interlocutory review.}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Circle A challenges interlocutory review of this case on the following two grounds: (1) Dillingham}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s failure to adhere to the requirements of GRAP 12; and, (2) Dillingham}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s failure to show that interlocutory review is proper under any of the three grounds outlined in 7 GCA }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
 3108(b).}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [8]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s first challenge to the interlocutory review of this appeal is Dillingham}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s failure to follow the requirements of GRAP 12(a), which provides:}{\insrsid2557687 
\par }{\insrsid4156459\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Stay Must Ordinarily Be Sought in the First Instance in Superior Court; Motion for Stay in Supreme Court}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 .

\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Application for a stay of the judgment or order
 of the Superior Court pending appeal, or for approval of a supercedes bond, or for an order suspending, modifying, restoring or granting an injunction during the pendency of an appeal must ordinarily be made in the first instance in the Superior Court.}{
\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 A
 motion for such relief may be made to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, but the motion shall show that application to the Superior Court for the relief sought is not practicable, or that the Superior Court has denied an application, or has failed t
o afford the relief which the applicant requested, with the reasons given by the Superior Court for its action.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
The motion shall also show the reasons for the relief requested and the facts relied upon, and if the facts are subject to dispute, the motion shall be supported by affidavits or other sworn statements or copies thereof.}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 With the motion shall be filed such parts of the record as are relevant.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Reasonable notice of the motion shall be given to all parties.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par Guam R. App. P. 12(a).}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Circle A argues that Dillingham }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 should have asked for [the] Superior Court}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s . . . ruling on whether this matter qualified for review}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  before seeking review in this court.}{
\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Appellee}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s Brief, p. 8.}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 After reviewing the Guam statutes, we find Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s argument unpersuasive.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 First, GRAP 12(a) is inapplicable to the present case.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
Circle A itself admits to the weakness of its argument by recognizing that GRAP 12(a) }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
do[es] not directly address the actions Dillingham should take in requesting an interlocutory review.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Appellee}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s Brief, p. 8.}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Second, Title 7 GCA }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
 3108(b), the provision that confers upon the Supreme Cou
rt the discretion to conduct an interlocutory review over non-final orders or judgments, does not direct the appellant to request for a stay or an injunction at the trial court level, before requesting for an interlocutory review in this court.}{
\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Furthermore, there is no authority, whether statutory or otherwise, which supports Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s contention.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Consequently, Dillingham}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s alleged failure to request the trial court for a }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 stay }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 or }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 injunction }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
pending appeal does not preclude us from conducting an interlocutory review of the case.}{\insrsid4156459 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [9]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s next challenge to interlocutory review is that Dillingham}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s appeal fails to meet any of the three grounds set forth in 7 GCA }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
 3108(b), which would justify interlocutory review.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 We disagree.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Title 7 GCA }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  3108(b) delineates the three instances when this court could exercise interlocutory review over a non-final order and states in relevant part:
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 (b) Interlocutory review. Orders other than final judgments shall be available to immediate appellate review as p
rovided by law and in other cases only at the discretion of the Supreme Court where it determines that resolution of the questions of law on which the order is based will:}{\insrsid2557687 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid4156459\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \fi-22\li1440\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin1440\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 (1) Materially advance the termination of the litigation or clarify further proceedings therein;
\par (2) Protect a party from substantial and irreparable injury; or
\par (3) Clarify issues of general importance in the administration of justice.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par Title 7 GCA }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  3108(b) (1994).}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
In the present case, the two issues that have been raised for this court}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s consideration are the applicability of both the contractual period of limitation clause and the arbitration clause contained in the General Conditions.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 As we explai
n below, we are convinced that this case is ripe for interlocutory review.}{\insrsid2557687 
\par }{\insrsid4156459\charrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [10]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab First, the resolution of whether the contractual period of limitation applies will }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 materially advance the termination of the litigation or clarify further proceedings therein . . . .}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 7 GCA }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  3108(b)(1); }{
\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 see also Guam Yun Shan Enters., Inc. v. Shenzhen Dev. Bank, Ltd.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 1998 Guam 21, }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  3 (granting interlocutory review on a }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
summary judgment dismissal and denial of the motion for leave to amend}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  because }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
[r]eview of . . . [the] matter will serve to advance the termination of the litigation and clarify further proceedings.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 ); }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Stenger Indus., Inc. v. Int}{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
l Ins. Co.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 74 B.R. 1017, 1019-20 (Ga. 1987) (granting interlocutory review in the determination of whether a limitations period applied and whether the trial court properly denied summary judgment).}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 A finding by this court that the one year period of limitation contained in the General Conditions applies will effectively bar Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s suit because the suit was brought one year after the substantial completion of the project.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
Solomon v. A. Julian Inc.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 450 A.2d 130, 132 (Pa. Super Ct. 1982) (}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
The contractual period of limitation, if timely raised, operates to effectively bar an otherwise valid, but stale, claim. . . . it constitutes an affirmative defense, the same as a statutory period of limitation . . . .}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 ); }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 see also Gustine Uniontown Assocs. v. Anthony Crane Rental, Inc.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
, 786 A.2d 246, 250 (Pa. Super Ct. 2001) (finding that interlocutory review was proper in determining which proper statute of limitation to apply because }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 an immediate appeal may enhance the prospects of settlement and that a later appellate disposition might result in remand for duplicative and costly re-litigation of complex trial issues.}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 ).}{\insrsid2557687 
\par }{\insrsid4156459\charrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [11]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab We find persuasive the case of }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Kilgore v. Barnes}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
, 490 So. 2d 895 (Miss. 1986), where the Mississippi Supreme Court granted interlocutory review to consider a statute of limitations issue.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Kilgore}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
, 490 So. 2d at 896; }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 see also Am. Transp., Inc. v. Thompson}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
, 460 S.E.2d 298, 299 (Ga. Ct. App. 1995) (granting interlocutory review in determining whether the trial court correctly held that the amended complaint was not barred by the statute of limitations); }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Stenger Indus.}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 74 B.R. at 1019 (granting interlocutory review in the determination of whether the statute of limitation period applied and whether the trial court properly denied summary judgment).}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 The }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Kilgore}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  court provided the following rationale why such an issue was p}{\insrsid4156459 roper for interlocutory review:}{\insrsid2557687 
\par }{\insrsid4156459\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 The present case, we feel, is an appropriate one for an interlocutory appeal. Should the appellants be successful this Court will, by its d
ecision, settle the controlling principle of law in this case which is unclear and which will also affect other pending similar cases. The trial courts will then be able to act with reasonable assurance as to which statute of limitation applies and thereb
y prevent inconsistent decisions. Additionally, if the appellants are successful, the case will be resolved without resort to a lengt}{\insrsid4156459 hy and costly trial and appeal.}{\insrsid2557687 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid4156459\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Kilgore}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 490 So. 2d at 896.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
Similarly in this case, if Dillingham successfully argues that the contractual period of limitation applies, the parties will not have to }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 resort to a lengthy and costly trial and appeal.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Id}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 .}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Consequently, the lower court}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s decision with regard to the contractual limitations period is appropriate for interlocutory review.}{\insrsid2557687 
\par }{\insrsid4156459\charrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [12]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab Second, the resolution of whether the arbitration clause applies will }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 clarify further proceedings}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  and }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [c]larify issues of general importance in the administration of justice.}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 7 GCA }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  3108(b)(1), (3); }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 see also Brown v. Eastman Kodak Co.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 2000 Guam 30, }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  1 (granting interlocutory review to }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 clarify issues of general importance in the administration of justice}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  in reviewing }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 the lower court}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s set-aside of judgment pursuant to Rule 60(b)(6) of the Guam Rules of Civil Procedure.}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 ).}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 The policy behind arbitration is }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 to speed the resolution and determination of disputed issues.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Brooks v. Cigna Prop. & Cas. Cos.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 700 N.E.2d 1052, 1054 (Ill. App. Ct. 1998).}{
\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 The resolution of }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
[w]hether a dispute is within the scope of an arbitration clause should be determined at the earliest possible moment and should be controlled by judicial guidelines.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 J & K Cement Constr., Inc. v. Montalbano Builders, Inc.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 456 N.E.2d 889, 894 (Ill. App. Ct. 1983) (cita
tions and internal quotations omitted).}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Accordingly, we find that the denial of the motion to arbitrate is proper for interlocutory review.}{\insrsid2557687 
\par }{\insrsid4156459\charrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [13]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab In essence, because resolution of the issues raised by the parties comport with the grounds set forth in 7 GCA }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  3108(b), this case has been properly brought before us for interlocutory review.
\par }{\b\insrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 B.}{\b\insrsid4156459  }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Merits}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [14]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab Because we accept interlocutory review of this case, we now address the following two substantive iss
ues raised in this appeal: (1) whether the arbitration clause applies, and, (2) whether the contractua}{\insrsid4156459 l period of limitation applies.}{\insrsid2557687 
\par }{\insrsid4156459\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \fi1440\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 1.}{\b\insrsid4156459  }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Joint Resolution and Mandatory Arbitration Provisions }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [15]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab Section 11 of the General Conditions, entitled }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Dispute Resolution,}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
 provides that all claims and disputes that arise out of or relate to the Subcontract shall be arbitrated.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 In specific terms, provisions 11.1 and 11.2.1, state in pertinent part:
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 11.1 Unless waived by Contractor in writing, }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 all claims and disputes arising out of, or relating to}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , this Agreement shall be referred to a joint resolution panel consisting of senior executives (having full settlement authority) from
 Contractor and from Subcontractor for informal resolution prior to initiating arbitration or litigation concerning same.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 11.2.1 Agreement to Arbitrate.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
Subject to the condition precedent set forth in Paragraph 11.1 above}{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , all claims, disputes and matters in question arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the breach thereof}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
, except for claims which have been waived by the passage of time or by acceptance of final payment, shall be decided by binding arbitration in accordance with the Constructi
on Industry Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association currently in effect and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator or arbitrators may be entered in any court of competent jurisdiction; 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par Appellant}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s Excerpts of Record, p. 34 (General Conditions) (emphasis added).}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Dillingham asserts that Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s suit is barred pursuant to the above two provisions.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Moreover, Dillingham contends that Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s claims arise out of or relate to the Subcontract since several provisions of the Subcontract must be interpreted in order to adjudicate the claims.}{\insrsid4156459  We agree.}{
\insrsid2557687 
\par }{\insrsid4156459\charrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [16]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
Arbitration is regarded as an effective, expeditious, and cost-efficient method of dispute resolution}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
 and there is a strong policy consideration for the use and promotion of the process.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Salsitz v. Kreiss,}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  761 N.E.2d 724, 731 (Ill. 2001); }{
\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Jack B. Anglin Co. v. Tipps}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 842 S.W.2d 266, 268 n.2 (Tex. 1992) (noting that }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [a]t least 36 states . . . have adopted all or part of the Uniform Arbitration Act to encourage and facilitate the use of arbitration.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 ).}{\i\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Arbitration agreements are not void against public policy because a party who }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 sign[s] the arbitration agreements, [does] not give up [their substantive] right . . . only the ability to raise the issue in court.}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Tjart v. Smith Barney, Inc.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 28
 P.3d 823, 831-32 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001).}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
An agreement to arbitrate is valid unless grounds exist at law or in equity for the revocation of any contract, such as fraud or unconscionability.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Emerald Tex., Inc. v. Peel, }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 920 S.W.2d 398, 402 (Tex. Ct. App. 1996).}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Moreover, }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [a]ny doubts about the scope of an arbitration clause should be resolved in favor of arbitration.}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Gergel v. High View Homes, LLC}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
, 996 P.2d 233, 235 (Colo. Ct. App. 1999); }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Emerald Tex., }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 920 S.W.2d at 403; }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Carlin Pozzi Architects v. Bethel}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
, 767 A.2d 1272, 1276 (Conn. App. Ct. 2001); }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Rodgers Builders, Inc. v. McQueen}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 331 S.E.2d 726, 731 (N.C. Ct. App. 1985) (citations omitted).}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 However, an arbitration agreement is a matter of contract and }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
[t]he parties to an agreement are bound to arbitrate only those issues they have agreed to arbitrate, as shown by the clear language of the agreement and their intentions expressed in that language.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Salsitz,}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  761 N.E.2d at 731; }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 see also Ozdeger v. Altay}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 384 N.E.2d 82, 84 (Ill. App. Ct. 1978).}{\insrsid2557687 
\par }{\insrsid4156459\charrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [17]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab In the case at bar, the crucial issue before this court is whether Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s third claim for relief of negligence and fourth claim for relief of breach of contract arise out of or relate to the Subcontract.}{\cs15\super\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \chftn 
{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid2557687 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid2557687  The trial court}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 s rationale in denying Dillingham}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 
s summary judgment with respect to the arbitration issue and the contractual limitation period issue is that Circle A}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 s }{
\i\fs20\insrsid2557687 negligence}{\fs20\insrsid2557687  and }{\i\fs20\insrsid2557687 breach of contract}{\fs20\insrsid2557687  claims are }{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{
\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 not related to,}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{
\fs20\insrsid2557687  nor [sic] does it }{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 arise out of}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687  the contract,}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687  and }{\fs20\insrsid2557687 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 
the action is simply one for damages caused by the negligence of Dillingham.  The alleged negligence is independent of any contract and arises whether or not said contract exists.}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687   Appellant}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 
s Excerpts of Record, p. 41 (Decision and Order, January 7, 2002).  Based on the trial court}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 s reasoning, at th
e outset, we dispose of the issue of whether Circle A}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 s }{\i\fs20\insrsid2557687 breach of contract claim}{
\fs20\insrsid2557687  }{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 arises out of}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687  or }{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 relates to}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687  the Subcontract.  The trial court clearly erred in holding that Dillingham}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 s breach of contract claim does not germinate from the Subcontract.  }{\i\fs20\insrsid2557687 See Crisona v. Surgery Ctr. Anesthesiology Consultants, P.C.}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 , 743 So. 2d 452, 456 (Ala. 1999)}{
\i\fs20\insrsid2557687  }{\fs20\insrsid2557687 (finding that the party}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 s }{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 breach-of-contract claims arise out of and relate to the employment agreements and, thus, fall within the scope of the arbitration provision.}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 ).  Moreover, an arbitrator}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{
\fs20\insrsid2557687 s or court}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 s complete analysis of Circle A}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 s argument that }{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 
the actions or inactions of . . . [Dillingham] are in breach of contract, express or implied, between [Dillingham and Circle A] . . .,}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{
\fs20\insrsid2557687  would in itself entail a full examination of the Subcontract and the General Conditions signed by the two parties.  Appellant}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}
{\fs20\insrsid2557687 s Excerpts of Record, pp. 7-8 (Complaint, October 27, 2000).  We cannot easily conceive how a breach of contract claim does not arise out of the subject contract.  Accordingly, the thrust of this appeal is whether Circle A}{
\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 s }{\i\fs20\insrsid2557687 negligence}{\fs20\insrsid2557687  claim (and not the breach of contract claim) }{
\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 arises out of}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{
\fs20\insrsid2557687  the Subcontract, which would impute the applicability of both the one year contractual limitation period clause and the arbitration clause.}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
Courts in several jurisdictions, which have interpreted a similar clause to the present one, have construed the }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 arising out of}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  and }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 relating to}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  language broadly.}{\cs15\super\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {
\cs15\super\insrsid2557687 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid2557687  The high level of scrutiny that courts have employed in interpreting the }{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{
\fs20\insrsid2557687 arising out of}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687  or }{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 related to}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687  language is reflected when contrasted with the courts}{
\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687  interpretations of the phrase }{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 all disputes arising in connection with}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687  language, which is }{\fs20\insrsid2557687 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\i\fs20\insrsid2557687 read narrowly}{\fs20\insrsid2557687  to apply only to claims relating to matters specifically mentioned in the contract.}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687   }{\i\fs20\insrsid2557687 State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. George Hyman Constr. Co.}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 
, 715 N.E.2d 749, 756 (Ill. App. Ct. 1999)(citations omitted)(emphasis added); }{\i\fs20\insrsid2557687 Westville v. Loitz Bros. Constr. Co.}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 , 519 N.E.2d 37, 39 (Ill. App. Ct. 1988) (noting that }{\fs20\insrsid2557687 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 in comparison to a clause providing for arbitration of disputes }{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 arising in connection with}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687  a contract, a clause using the language }{
\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 arising out of, or relating to}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687  is broader in scope.}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 ) (citation omitted).  }}}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 See Gergel}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 996 P.2d at 236 (expressing that }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [t]he inclusion of the phrase }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 relating to}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
 in the warranty indicates that the scope of the arbitration provision is broad and inclusive, rather than narrow and exclusive.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 );}{\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Rodgers Builders, }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 331 S.E.2d at 732 (finding that }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 arising out of, or relating to}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  language to be }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 sufficiently broad to include }{
\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 any}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  claims which arise out of or are related to the contract or its breach, regardless of the characterization of the claims as tort or contract.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 ); }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Emerald Tex., }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 920 S.W.2d at 403 (finding that the }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 arising out of or relating}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  language to be }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
broad}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  and, therefore, that }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 arbitration should not be denied unless it can be said with positive assurance that the particular dispute is not covered.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 ); }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Carlin Pozzi}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 767 A.2d at 1276 (holding that the language }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 arising out of or relating to}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  is broad in scope and }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 precludes any exceptions so long as the claims, disputes or other matters in question between the parties arise out of or are related to the agreement or the breach thereof.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 ).}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 In light of the clause}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s broad interpretation, these courts have found that tort claims, including negligence, fall under the purview of the clause, and are therefore, arbitrable.}{
\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Rodgers Builders,}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  331 S.E.2d at 732; }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Zahn v. Dist. Ct.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 457 P.2d 387, 388
 (Colo. 1969) (the reviewing court affirmed the trial court}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s stay of proceedings pending arbitration even on plaintiff}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s claims }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
based on alleged unskillful and negligent construction, . . . contrary to plans and specifications and in violation . . . of building codes.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 ); }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Emerald Tex., }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 920 S.W.2d at 404 (holding that the negligence c
laim was not completely independent of the contract and was thus subject to arbitration.).
\par }{\b\insrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [18]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab Circle A argues that the negligence claim does not }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 arise from}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  or }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 relate to}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  the Subcontract because it is a tort that extends beyond the contract.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 However, we find Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s argument unpersuasive for two reasons.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 The first reason is that }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [t]he fact that a claim sounds in tort does not necessarily take it out of a clause requiring arbitration of a contract dispute.}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Gergel}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 996 P.2d at 235.}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 A close examination of Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s Complaint demonstrates that Circle A}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s negligence claim merely }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 frustrate[s] . . . [the] agreement to arbitrate, by simply framing the[] claim[] in tort.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Id}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 . at 235-36.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s third claim for relief of }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 negligence}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
 and fourth claim for relief of }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 breach of contract}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  are nearly identical.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
We note the following similarities between paragraphs 21-22 in support of the negligence cause of action and paragraphs 24-25 in support of the breach of contract cause of action found in Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s Complaint:
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 21.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 At the time of the tragedy, namely the double tee and header beam collapse, Defendant}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s negligent, willful, and/or in
tentional actions or inactions proximately caused damage to excavation equipment of Plaintiff Circle A Excavation Co., located immediately underneath the structure.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
The Machinery included a PC-220 excavator, a 555D backhoe, a soil impounder, and miscellaneous other equipment that was destroyed or damaged.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
The value of replacement or repair of the equipment is in excess of $175,500.00.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 22.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 As a proximate result of Defendant}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s willful and negligent inactions and
 actions, the Plaintiffs Circle A Excavation Co., Michael Langdon, and Michelle Langdon, have suffered loss of personal and equipment rental time, uncompensated wages paid to employees, interruption and impairment of business revenues, loss of business re
venues, loss of business reputation, incurring of expenses or obligations associated with contractual, legal or statutory obligations to employees, and other damages in an amount in excess of $2,175,500.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 . . . .
\par 24.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 . . . . In that at the time of the tragedy, namely the double tee and header beam collapse, Defendant}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s actions or inactions proximate caused damage to excavation equipment of Plaintiff Circle A Excavation Co., located immediately underneath the structure.}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 The Machinery included a PC-220 excavator, a 555D backhoe, a soil impounder, and miscellaneous other equipment that was destroyed or damaged.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
The value of replacement or repair of the equipment is in excess of $175,500.00.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 25.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 As a proximate result of Defendant}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s breach of contract, express or implied, the Plaintiffs Circle A Excavation Co., Michael Langdon, and Michelle Langdon, have suffered loss of personal and equipment re
ntal time, uncompensated wages paid to employees, interruption and impairment of business revenues, loss of business reputation, incurring of expenses or obligations associated with contractual, legal or statutory obligations to employees, incidental and 
consequential damages, and other damages in an amount in excess of $2,175,500.
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par Appellant}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s Excerpts of Record, pp. 7-8 (Complaint, October 27, 2000).}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [19]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab We find this case analogous to }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 J & K Cement Constr., Inc. v. Montalbano Builders, Inc.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
, 456 N.E.2d 889 (Ill. App. Ct. 1983), where the court held that the negligence cause of action arose from the contract and was therefore arbitrable.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 In }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
J & K Cement Construction}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , several causes of action were raised including a Count I breach of contract claim and a Count V negligence claim.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Id.}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  at 895-896.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 However, the court found that }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 the negligence term [was used] to describe a breach owed . . . by virtue of the parties}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  contract and not from a duty based in tort.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Id}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  at 896.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 The court grounded its finding on the fact that in support of its negligence count, the complaining party }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 alleged the identical defects in construction contained in Count I,}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  the breach of contract count.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Id}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 .}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Similarly, we find that Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s negligence claim is grounded upon Dillingham}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s breach of the Subcontract because of the similarities that exist in the allegations that support both the negligence and breach of contract claims.
\par }{\b\insrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [20]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab The second reason why Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s negligence claim arises out of the Subcontract is because we agree with Dillingham}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s contention that in order to adjudicate Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s claims, several provisions of the Subcontract must be interpreted.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 See }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Appellant}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s Opening Brief, p. 12.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 For example, Section Two of the General Conditions outlines Circle A}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s responsibility in the performance of their work.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
Of special import is section 2.1.4, which provides:}{\insrsid2557687 
\par }{\insrsid4156459\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 If part of Subcontractor}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}
{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s Work depends for proper execution or results upon construction or operations by Contractor or other trades, }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Subcontractor shall prior to proceeding with that portion of the Work}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , promptly report to Contractor all discrepancies or defects in such other construction or operations that render it unsuitable for proper execution or results.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
Failure of Subcontractor to report such discrepancies or defects shall constitute an acknowledgment by Subcontractor that such construction or operations is fit and proper}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  to receive Subcontractor}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s Work, and }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
by proceeding with such portion of the Work, Subcontractor waives all claims for damages resulting from discrepancies or defects which Subcontractor has or should have discovered through reasonable diligence}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 .
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par Appellant}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s Excerpts of Record, p. 27 (General Conditions) (emphasis added).}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Here, Circle A contends that Dillingham}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s improper installation of t
he beam structure resulted in the collapse.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Circle A further asserts that Dillingham}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}
{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s General Superintendent }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
knew or should have known there was a wholly improper installation in the area where he directed}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
 Circle A employees to work even though }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
no spot welding, correct angle-iron, corbel installation, and bearing pads were in place to protect against collapse of the structure.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Appellant}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s Excerpts of Record, pp. 4-5 (Complaint, October 27, 2000).}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 However, under section 2.1.4, Dillingham could presumably argue that Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s choice to proceed with the ordered work given the substandard condition and defects that Circle A alleges meant that Circle A }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 waive[d] all claims for damages resulting from . . . [the] defects.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Appellant}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s Excerpts of Reco}{\insrsid4156459 rd, p. 27 (General Conditions).}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [21]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab Another pertinent part of the Subcontract is Section Six, entitled }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Protection of Persons and Property.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
Pursuant to the provisions under Section Six, it appears that Circle A as the Subcontractor undertook the responsibility for the safety of its employees, as reflected in the following:}{\insrsid2557687 
\par }{\insrsid4156459\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Section 6.1.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Safety Precautions and Programs.}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Subcontractor agrees that the prevention of accidents to its workers engaged in the Work, and to others in proximity thereto, is the responsibility of Subcontractor . . . .
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Section 6.2.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Safety of Persons and Property.}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Subcontractor shall take all precautions and measures for the safety of its operations, and shall provide all precautions to prevent damage, loss or injury to
: (A) all employees on the Work and all other persons who may be affected thereby; (B) all the Work and materials and equipment to be incorporated therein . . . .
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 . . . .
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Section 6.4.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Reporting of Dangerous Conditions and Accidents.}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Subcontractor shall promptly report any known dangerous or hazardous conditions existing on the Project site to Contractor, whether or not the Work is affected thereby . . . .
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par Appellant}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s Excerpts of Record, p. 31 (General Conditions).}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Although we do not interpret and determine the above provisions}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
 effects on Dillingham}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s liability in the case, the p
rovisions do illustrate how adjudication of Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s negligence claim would entail an interpretation of the Subcontract.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Such interpretation is indicative of the significant relationship between the negligence claim and the Subcontract.}{\insrsid2557687 

\par }{\insrsid4156459\charrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [22]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab In sum, we find that Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s negligence claim did }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 arise out of}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  and }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 relate to}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  the Subcontract.}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Accordingly, Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s claims fell within the arbitration clause.}{
\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 The trial court erred in denying Dillingham}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s summary judgment motion with res}{\insrsid4156459 pect to the arbitration clause.}{\insrsid2557687 
\par }{\insrsid4156459\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \fi1440\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 2.}{\b\insrsid4156459  }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Contractual Limitation of Action Provision}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [23]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab Dillingham argues that Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s claims are barred by the contractual limitation of action provision set forth in its construction Subcontract with Dillingham.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
Because the parties do not dispute that the project was substantially completed on June 30, 1999, Dillingham asserts that Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s Complaint, brought on October 27, 2000, surpasses that one year contractual limitation period.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 We agree. 
\par }{\b\insrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [24]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab Pursuant to section 11.2.4 of the General Conditions, }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [n]o action shall be maintained against the Contractor upon any claim }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 arising out of or based upon}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
 this Agreement unless commenced within one (1) year after Substantial Completion of the Project.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Appellant}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s Excerpts of Record, p. 34 (General Conditions).}{
\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Because both the contractual limitation period clause and the arbitration clause contain the same generic phrase, }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 arising out of,}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
 we incorporate our previous arbitration clause analysis above in the interpretation of the contractual limitation period clause.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Accordingly, for the same reasons outlined above wherein we found
 Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s negligence claim arbitrable because Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s negligent claim }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}
{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 arises out of}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  the Subcontract, we similarly find that the Subcontract}
{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 time limitation for claims}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
 is also applicable to the negligence claim.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [25]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab Notwithstanding Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s challenge to the limitation period}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s applicability based on the distinct
ion between a tort claim and a contract claim, Circle A fails to proffer any other arguments to dispute the underlying provision}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s enforceability.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 In view of such failure, we find no reason why the provision should not be enforced.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
A contractual limitations provision, such as the present, which }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
shorten[s] a statute of limitations can be validly contracted}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  as long as it }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 is not in itself unreasonable or is not so unreasonable as to show imposition or undue advantage.}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Capehart v. Heady}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
, 23 Cal. Rptr. 851, 852-53, 206 Cal. App. 2d 386, 388, (Ct. App. 1962).}{\cs15\super\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid2557687 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid2557687  The one year contractual limitation provision contained in the General Conditions is not unreasonable.  }{\i\fs20\insrsid2557687 
See Capehart v. Heady}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 , 23 Cal. Rptr. 851, 853, 206 Cal. App. 2d 386, 389 (Ct. App. 1962) (noting that }{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 
[t]hree months has been approved}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687  as not unreasonable.); }{\i\fs20\insrsid2557687 Stenger Indus., Inc. v. Int}{
\i\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\i\fs20\insrsid2557687 l Ins. Co.}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 , 74 B.R. 1017, 1019 n.1 (Ga. 1987) (finding that in the insurance context, a }{
\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 
one-year limitation is not against public policy provided the period fixed be not so unreasonable as to raise a presumption of imposition or undue advantage in some way.}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid2557687 ).}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Similar to an arbitration clause, }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [t]he contractual shortening of the Statute of Limitations does not, . . . limit a party}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s liability,}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
Diana Jewelers of Liverpool, Inc. v. A.D.T. Co.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 562 N.Y.S.2d 305, 306 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990), nor does it }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 conflict with public policy.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
Mars Assocs., Inc. v. New York City Educ. Constr. Fund}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 513 N.Y.S.2d 125, 128 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987) (citations and internal quotations omitted).}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
Instead, the contractual limitation period }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 more e
ffectively secures the end sought to be attained by the statute of limitations,}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  }{
\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Mars Assocs.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 513 N.Y.S.2d at 128 (citations and internal quotations omitted), which is }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 the prompt resolution of disputes while the evidence is still fresh and available.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid4156459  }{\i\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Diana Jewelers}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 , 562 N.Y.S.2d at 306.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [26]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab In light of the contractual limitation period}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s applicability to the negligence claim and Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s failure to challenge the validity of the provision, we hold that the clause is enforceable.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Consequently, our holding effectively bars Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s suit against Dillingham because the Complaint was filed one year after the Project was substantially completed.
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 IV.}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4156459 {\b\insrsid4156459 
\par }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 [27]}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 \tab We find that both the arbitration clause and the contractual limitation period clause are applicable to Circle A}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s negligence and breach of contract claims for relief because the claims }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 arise from,}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 relate to,}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  or are }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 based on}{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  the Subcontract.}{\insrsid4156459  }{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 Accordingly, we }{
\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 REVERSE}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  the trial court}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 
s denial of Dillingham}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 s summary judgment motions on both issues.}{\insrsid4156459  }{
\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 The cause is }{\b\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459 REMANDED}{\insrsid2557687\charrsid4156459  for the trial court to enter judgment in favor of Dillingham consistent with this opinion.
\par }}