Legal Opinion

Bank of Harlem v. City of Bayonne

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided February 15, 1891PublishedCited by 3 opinions

On the 20th of May, 1889, the mayor and council of the city of Bayonne, as parties of the first part, entered into a contract with Charles T. Munn and John Phelan, therein described to be “co-partners under the firm name of Munn & Phelan, contractors, party of the second part,” by which the said Munn & Phelan undertook to build a sewer and appurtenances in said city, of the dimensions, in the manner, and under the conditions specified in the said contract, for the…

Read the full summary

On the 20th of May, 1889, the mayor and council of the city of Bayonne, as parties of the first part, entered into a contract with Charles T. Munn and John Phelan, therein described to be “co-partners under the firm name of Munn & Phelan, contractors, party of the second part,” by which the said Munn & Phelan undertook to build a sewer and appurtenances in said city, of the dimensions, in the manner, and under the conditions specified in the said contract, for the consideration of $11,050, and the sum of $6.50 per cubic yard for each cubic yard of rock excavated and returned by the engineer…

1Opinion of the Court

Green, V. C.

The city officials seem to have proceeded on the theory that ¡acceptance on its part was necessary to the validity of a transfer ■of money payable by the city on a contract. The city clerk was ■directed by the council, with no little formality, to return to the •complainants the assignments and notices which had been served, ¡in one instance, “ with the explanation that the city cannot recognize any such notice.” The position assumed misconceives the mature of, if it does not entirely ignore, those transfers of particular funds, known as equitable assignments, recognized and…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Field v. . the Mayor, C. of New-YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1852
  2. Brill v. . TuttleNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
  3. Lauer v. . DunnNew York Court of Appeals · 1889

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Structural Gypsum Corp. v. National, C., Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1930
  2. Stokely Bros. Co., Inc. v. ConklinNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1942
  3. Mayo v. City National Bank & Trust Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1968

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

Powered by the Exa API