Legal Opinion
Boylhart v. DiMarco & Reimann, Inc.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided March 3, 1936PublishedCited by 54 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCrouch, J.
The respondent, DiMarco & Reimann, Inc., contracted with the city of New York to construct part of a new subway. Under the contract, portions of the construction work might be sublet to subcontractors approved by the city. The steel construction was so sublet to the Rosaire Contracting Company. The contractor was authorized by the city to occupy such portions of the street surface as might be necessary for the storage of materials. Certain steel beams to be used in the structure were stored on a neighboring street, insecurely piled by the subcontractor. The infant plaintiff with two…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Storrs v. . the City of UticaNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Kunz v. . City of TroyNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Deming v. . Terminal Railway of BuffaloNew York Court of Appeals · 1901
- Hyman v. . BarrettNew York Court of Appeals · 1918
- Herrington v. . Village of LansingburghNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by54 opinions
- Wright v. Tudor City Twelfth Unit, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1938
- Schroeder v. City County Savings Bank, AlbanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1944
- Thomassen v. J & K Diner, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- Brown v. Welsbach Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1950
- Bowers v. City Bank Farmers Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1940
49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.