Legal Opinion
Miller v. Fitzpatrick
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided October 15, 1929PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
On the appeal of the State of New York, judgment affirmed, without costs. We are of opinion that the changes in the Lien Law, made after this action was at issue, did not expressly nor impliedly withdraw the State’s consent to be sued as the law then stood (Anderson v. Hayes Const. Co., 243 N. Y. 140.) The State makes no contention that the contractors could not have enforced their claim for damages for breach of contract had there been no change in the Lien Law. We also approve the finding that, as between the State and the contractors, Fitzpatrick and MacArthur, the breach was committed by…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Anderson v. John L. Hayes Construction Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1926
- Warren Trading Corp. v. Kraglan Building Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1927
3Cited by5 opinions
- County of Rockland v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
- The Dick Sand Co. v. StateNew York Supreme Court · 1930
- Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. First National Bank & Trust Co. of Paterson, New JerseyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1953
- American Cement Corp. v. Dunetz Bros.New York Supreme Court · 1965
- In re New Jersey Window Sales, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 2001