Legal Opinion

Gill, Korff & Associate v. County of Onondaga

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided July 12, 1989PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memoran*913dum: Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs complaint which sought payment for engineering services rendered for the County of Onondaga in connection with its resource recovery project. County Law § 362 (3) provides that ”[n]o expenditure, or contract which in any manner involves the expenditure of money or the incurring of any pecuniary liability, shall be made or entered into by any administrative unit, officer or employee, unless an amount has been appropriated and is available therefor or has been authorized…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Vrooman v. Village of MiddlevilleAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
  2. Gill, Korff & Associate v. County of OnondagaNew York Supreme Court · 1985

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Housing Works, Inc. v. TurnerDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2001
  2. H & R Project Associates, Inc. v. City of SyracuseAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
  3. Landcom, Inc. v. Galen-Lyons Joint Landfill CommissionAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
  4. Kerlikowske v. City of BuffaloAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
  5. Nassau County v. Inc. Village of RoslynAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API