Legal Opinion · Dissent
Verizon New York, Inc. v. Sprint PCS
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided September 13, 2007Published
1DissentMcGuire, J.
in a memorandum as follows: Supreme Court correctly determined that plaintiffs action is time-barred. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent.
On April 6, 1999, the parties entered into a contract pursuant to which plaintiff agreed to diversify cable routes for defendant. Under the contract, plaintiff estimated that the cost of the work would be $100,000, and defendant was to pay that amount within 60 days of the date of the contract. The contract contemplated that the work might be completed either over or under the estimate; plaintiff was to bill defendant for any additional cost over the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Ely-Cruikshank Co. v. Bank of MontrealNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
- John J. Kassner & Co. v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
- City of New York v. StateNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
- Swift v. New York Medical CollegeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- Phillips Construction Co. v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.