Fitzpatrick v. Devlin
New York Supreme Court
Action to foreclose a lien under a contract for a public improvement. At the time when the alleged lien was filed, there was no fund due the contractor from the city under the contract, and the defendant Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland, therefore, claims that the alleged lien was not a valid one.
1Opinion of the CourtGtegebich, J.
The action is brought to foreclose a lien under a contract for a public improvement, and it *557is conceded that the plaintiff is entitled to judgment against the defendant Devlin as contractor. The question is whether the defendant Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland is likewise liable upon its undertaking given to discharge the lien, which undertaking was conditioned for the payment of any judgment recovered by the plaintiff against the said Devlin “ in any action or proceeding to enforce the alleged lien filed by the said plaintiff against the moneys due or to g’rdw due to the said John…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Berger Manufacturing Co. v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1912
- Hawkins v. Mapes-Reeve Construction Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1903
- Casey v. Connors Brothers Construction Co.New York Supreme Court · 1907
3Cited by1 opinion
- Audley Clarke Co. v. W. F. Plass & Bro.New York Supreme Court · 1918