Legal Opinion

Armco Drainage & Metal Products, Inc. v. State

New York Court of Claims

Decided December 23, 1955No. Claim No. 32880PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSylvester, J.

This motion to dismiss the claim for insufficiency arises out of a subcontract entered into by claimant for the construction of a tunnel as part of a State project in Broome County. The prime contract, as required by section 220 of the Labor Law, included a schedule of minimum hourly rates of pay which was also embodied in claimant’s subcontract. Claimant alleges that the only job classification and minimum rate of pay applicable to work in tunnels contained in the schedule was “ common laborer ” at $1.71 per hour. Claimant entered upon the construction of the tunnel on September 15, 1952,…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Lawrence v. . FoxNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
  2. Foley Bros., Inc. v. FilardoSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  3. Seaver v. . RansomNew York Court of Appeals · 1918
  4. Talcott v. . City of BuffaloNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
  5. Gerdes v. ReynoldsNew York Court of Appeals · 1939

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Brian Hoxie's Painting Co. v. Cato-Meridian Central School DistrictNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
  2. Armco Drainage & Metal Products, Inc. v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1956

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

Powered by the Exa API