Detwiller v. Mayor of New York
New York Supreme Court
This action was brought to recover for fire-works furnished to the defendants on the 4th July, 1869. There was no specific contract for the price to be paid, but a resolution was passed by the common council and approved by the mayor 16th June, 1869, appointing a special committee to make arrangements to celebrate the anniversary of American Independence, and appropriating $30,000 to pay the expenses, to be taken from the appropriation for city contingencies-Under this…
Read the full summary
This action was brought to recover for fire-works furnished to the defendants on the 4th July, 1869. There was no specific contract for the price to be paid, but a resolution was passed by the common council and approved by the mayor 16th June, 1869, appointing a special committee to make arrangements to celebrate the anniversary of American Independence, and appropriating $30,000 to pay the expenses, to be taken from the appropriation for city contingencies-Under this resolution the committee authorized the firm of Lilliendahl & Co. to furnish $22,000 worth of fire-works for the „ purpose…
1Opinion of the CourtIngraham, P. J.
Under ordinary circumstanced the proof on the part of the plaintiff was amply sufficient to establish a good cause of action in favor of the plaintiff, who was the assignee of Lilliendahl & Co. for whatever was shown to be the value of the articles furnished under the authority of the committee.
The defendants moved for a dismissal of the complaint on the following grounds:
1st. That the amount involved exceeded $250, and should, therefore, have been done by contract after reception of bids therefor.
■ 2d. That there was no money in the treasury applicable to the plaintiff’s claim.
These were…
2Cited by2 opinions
- City of Hartford v. Hartford Electric Light Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1895
- Gleason v. DaltonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898