Legal Opinion

In re Wood

New York Supreme Court

Decided June 1, 1868PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court, Ingraham, J.

We have heretofore held that it was irregular, within the meaning of the act of *2761858, (Laws of 1858, ch. 338,) to do several things which are complained of in this petition; among which are the following: .

[New York General Term, June 1, 1868.

Geo. G. Barnard, Ingraham, and Sutherland, Justices.

1st. The contract and specifications did not provide for taking up the gutter stones and paving in their place with Belgian pavement, but on the contrary required the contractor to readjust the gutter stones wherever necessary, without charge. In violation of this he…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. In re EagerNew York Supreme Court · 1871
  2. In re EagerNew York Supreme Court · 1870
  3. In re McCormackNew York Supreme Court · 1870
  4. In re McCormackNew York Supreme Court · 1870

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API