Legal Opinion
Carroll-Ratner Corp. v. City Manager of New Rochelle
New York Supreme Court
Decided August 24, 1967PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
John H. Galloway, Jr., J.
Respondents (hereinafter “ the City”) move to dismiss that portion of petitioners’ reply to their answer designated as “ For a Supplement to the Petition ”, upon the ground that it fails to state • — cause of action and is insufficient in law. The intervenor-respondent (hereinafter “ Valenti ”) joins in the motion.
Petitioner sought initially under CPLR article 78, an order in the nature of mandamus awarding a certain public improvement contract for electrical construction work to the petitioner, as the lowest bidder, (rather than to respondent Valenti), or in the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Saperstein v. Mechanics & Farmers Savings BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
- Molloy v. . City of New RochelleNew York Court of Appeals · 1910
- Luboil Heat & Power Corp. v. PleydellNew York Supreme Court · 1942
- Molloy v. City of New RochelleAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908
- McNeil v. Board of SupervisorsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- City of Scottsdale v. DeemCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1976
- Rubino v. LolliCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
- Marine Electric Railway Products Division, Inc. v. New York City Transit Authority (In re Marine Electric Railway Products Division, Inc.)District Court, E.D. New York · 1982
- Van-Go Transport Co. v. New York City Board of EducationDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1999
- North Country Development Corp. v. Massena Housing AuthorityNew York Supreme Court · 1970
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.