People ex rel. Bullard v. Contracting Board
New York Supreme Court
HIS is an appeal from an order made at a special term, granting a peremptory mandamus against the defendants. On the 7th of December, 1860, an order was granted at the Albany special term, that the defendants show cause at a special term, to he held at Ballston Spa on the 11th of the same month, why a peremptory mandamus should not issue against them, to compel them to award a contract to the relator.
Read the full summary
HIS is an appeal from an order made at a special term, granting a peremptory mandamus against the defendants. On the 7th of December, 1860, an order was granted at the Albany special term, that the defendants show cause at a special term, to he held at Ballston Spa on the 11th of the same month, why a peremptory mandamus should not issue against them, to compel them to award a contract to the relator. Upon the hearing of the motion it was shown by affidavits that the defendants, in pursuance of law, advertised for sealed proposals for the rebuilding of the Bassett lock on Champlain canal. By…
1Opinion of the CourtGould, J.
A careful reading of the different parts of the 10th section of chapter 329 of the laws of 1854, (Bess. L. 1854, 696, 7,) has entirely satisfied me that its provisions were not fully appreciated on the argument. Subdivision 3 of that section must be construed to mean that the terms of the *515contract (into which .the successful bidder would be required to enter) should be “prescribed by the contracting board,” not, as was claimed on the argument, after the bidding and before the execution of the contract itself, but before the bidding; so that the bidder might see what kind of a contract he was…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Fones Hardware Co. v. ErbSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1891