Legal Opinion
A.J. Temple Marble & Tile, Inc. v. Long Island Rail Road
New York Supreme Court
Decided April 14, 1997PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Arthur W. Lonschein, J.
The defendant’s motion is determined as follows:
*423The plaintiff, A.J. Temple Marble & Tile, Inc. (Temple), and the defendant, the Long Island Rail Road (LIRR), a public benefits corporation owned by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, entered into a contract on October 4, 1994 to clean Penn Station. Temple was the 9th lowest bidder out of 11 bidders on the project. Three contractors who had bid for the contract filed protests with the LIRR over its award to Temple. One of the lowest bidders, Nelson Maintenance (Nelson), brought a CPLR article 78…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Krygoski Construction Company, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
- Caldwell & Santmyer, Inc. v. Dan Glickman, Secretary of AgricultureCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
3Cited by3 opinions
- A.J. Temple Marble & Tile, Inc. v. Long Island RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- A.J. Temple Marble & Tile, Inc. v. Long Island RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- A.L. Prime Energy Consultant, Inc. v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation AuthorityMassachusetts Superior Court, Suffolk County · 2017