Legal Opinion

Hastings Pavement Co. v. Cromwell

New York Supreme Court

Decided April 15, 1910No. Action No. 1PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Application for an injunction.

1Opinion of the CourtClark, J.

Application by the plaintiffs in two separate actions, involving substantially the same subject-matter, to continue pendente lite injunction orders previously granted with a temporary stay.. This opinion is written in both actions.

On December 2-7, 1909, the president of the borough of Bichmond advertised for sealed bids, which would be received until twelve o’clock noon, January 11, 1910, for regulating and paving a portion of the Fingerboard road with bitulithic pavement, or with asphalt blocks. On January 10, 1910, there were issued the injunction orders above referred to, against the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Rose v. LowAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1903
  2. Kessler v. . HerklotzNew York Court of Appeals · 1907
  3. Barber Asphalt Paving Co. v. WillcoxAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1904
  4. Warren Bros. v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1907
  5. Warwick v. Mayor of New YorkNew York Supreme Court · 1858

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Surdell v. City of OswegoNew York Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Hastings Pavement Co. v. CromwellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1911

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

Powered by the Exa API