Legal Opinion
Garofano Construction Co. v. City of New York
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
Decided June 10, 1943PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion Per Curiam.
On the authority of Bohnen v. Metz (126 App. Piv. 807, First Department, affirmed on opinion below, 193 N. Y. 676) and Ewen v. Thompson-Starrett Co. (208 N. Y. 245), we are bound to hold that subdivision 3 of section 220 of the Labor Law, commonly known as the Prevailing Bate of Wages Law, has no application to work on materials entering into the construction of a public works project where such work was not done at or about the site of the project and is not customarily and normally done at such site. This is the rule even though the work is actually done in the same city…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Cannon v. CannonNew York Court of Appeals · 1942
- Ryan v. . City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1904
- Ewen v. . Thompson-Starrett Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1913
- Titus v. BookerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1926
- Cannon v. CannonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1940
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- People v. BourneAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
- 106 Mile Transport Associates v. KochDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1987
- Ramaglia v. New York State Department of TransportationAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- De La Cruz v. Caddell Dry Dock & Repair Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012