Buyer’s constant changes in accounting entries, not Sellers’). The Arbitration Clause Was Not Triggered In addition, § 2.5(d) of the Purchase Agreement sets forth the preconditions for arbitrating an adjustment to the Closing Working Capital Statement. In the event that (1) a Closing Working Capital Statement was delivered by the Buyer within the prescribed sixty day period, and (2) the Sellers made an Adjustment Request withi very of Parkstone’s Closing Working Capital Statement was unauthorized, reference to the neutral auditor would be inappropriate under the terms of the Purchase Agreement, because the conditions leading to its neutral auditor provision were not triggered. See Serringer v. Bd. of Trs. Of Vill. of Tuxedo Park, 265 A.D.2d 561, 697 N.Y.S.2d 124, 125 (N.Y.App.Div.1999) (<HOLDING>) (quoting County of Rockland v. Primiano
holding that a condition was precedent to performance because the contract language did not explicitly state that it was precedent to formation holding that rcras notice provision is a condition precedent to all claims holding that clean water acts notice provision is a condition precedent to all claims holding that when fulfillment of contractual condition precedent is a precondition to access to the arbitral forum it is error to submit claims to arbitrator holding policy provision requiring an insured to submit to an examination under oath is a condition precedent to suit rather than a cooperation clause