Legal Opinion

Duffy Bros. v. Bing & Bing, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided May 14, 1926PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMartin, J.

The defendant applied for judgment on the pleadings, consisting of the complaint and the amended answer. This motion was denied at Special Term.

The agreement out of which the action arises is set out in full as an exhibit attached to the complaint. It may be referred to as the contract for the plastering work in an addition to the Hotel St. George in Brooklyn. It provides that plaintiff shall be paid therefor the sum of $72,000; and it also provides:

“It is understood that the general progress of the building is behind that scheduled and contractor agrees to cooperate with builder in handling…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Sweet v. . MorrisonNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
  2. Doll v. . NobleNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
  3. Burke v. Mayor of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
  4. Smith v. MayorAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
  5. Sewer Commissioners v. SullivanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Schachter v. Citigroup, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2009
  2. Atma v. MunozNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Pasternack v. DiamondAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1957

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API