Coyle v. City of Brooklyn
New York Supreme Court
mHIS action was "brought to recover money due on a X contract entered into between Patrick Coyle, deceased, and the city of Brooklyn, for the paving of Grand street with Belgian pavement. The contract bears date the 14th day of April, 1865. The work was commenced in the month of March previous, and was completed about the 16th day of September, 1865. Coyle died on the 30th day of May, 1865, and the plaintiff is his administratrix.
Read the full summary
mHIS action was "brought to recover money due on a X contract entered into between Patrick Coyle, deceased, and the city of Brooklyn, for the paving of Grand street with Belgian pavement. The contract bears date the 14th day of April, 1865. The work was commenced in the month of March previous, and was completed about the 16th day of September, 1865. Coyle died on the 30th day of May, 1865, and the plaintiff is his administratrix. The gross amount of the contract was $31,777.50, and on the 28th day of June, 1865, there was paid to the plaintiff in this action, on account, the sum of $7070. On…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, J. F. Barnard, J.
There was but one question of fact between the parties, which has been determined by the jury. It was not disputed but that the contract of the city of Brooklyn with the plaintiff’s deceased husband had been executed. The defendant claimed to have paid the price of performance. This claim was supported by proof tending to show that William B. Lewis, who had received the money due upon the contract, was a partner therein with the plaintiff’s intestate, and also by evidence that the plaintiff had in fact authorized the defendant to *56pay Lewis. The evidence of the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Stilwell v. . Mutual Life Insurance Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1878
- People v. Globe Mutual Life InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1884