Barrett Foods Corp. v. New York City Board of Education

144 A.D.2d 410, 533 N.Y.S.2d 970, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11766
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 14, 1988
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 144 A.D.2d 410 (Barrett Foods Corp. v. New York City Board of Education) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Barrett Foods Corp. v. New York City Board of Education, 144 A.D.2d 410, 533 N.Y.S.2d 970, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11766 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to compel the appellant to award the petitioner a certain contract, the appeal, as limited by the appellant’s brief, is from so much of an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Spodek, J.), dated March 9, 1987, as, upon reargument, adhered to its original determination granting the petition and awarding the petitioner the contract.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

In September 1986 the New York City Board of Education solicited bids for a contract to process food commodities into different categories of precooked products. Although Barrett [411]*411Foods Corp. appeared to be the low bidder on certain categories, the appellant rejected the petitioner’s bid on the ground that it failed to abide by the bid instructions. The petitioner instituted the instant proceeding to compel the appellant to award it the contract. The Supreme Court granted the petition. The appellant moved for reargument, reargument was granted, but the court adhered to its original determination. This appeal ensued.

By its terms, the contract expired on September 30, 1988. Given this fact, as well as the fact that the petitioner did not seek and could not obtain damages in this action (see, Matter of Allen v Eberling, 24 AD2d 594), it is clear that the rights of the parties will not be directly affected by the determination on appeal. Therefore, the appeal must be dismissed as academic (see, Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714). We note that the appellant does not oppose the dismissal of this appeal as academic. Mangano, J. P., Lawrence, Spatt and Harwood, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Katz v. Hampton Hills Assoc. Gen. Partnership
2020 NY Slip Op 4545 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Festa v. Festa
76 A.D.2d 1047 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Milcon Construction Corp. v. Freeport Union Free School District
74 A.D.3d 1206 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Bucaro v. Morales
62 A.D.3d 994 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Parton v. Summit Children's Residence Center, Inc.
37 A.D.3d 688 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Peconic Baykeeper, Inc. v. Suffolk County
28 A.D.3d 669 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Klam v. Klam
239 A.D.2d 390 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Stride Contracting Corp. v. Board of Contract & Supply
181 A.D.2d 876 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
Crane-Hogan Structural Systems, Inc. v. Board of Contract & Supply of the City of Utica
168 A.D.2d 904 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
SOS Oil Corp. v. Norstar Bank
152 A.D.2d 223 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
Habe v. Triola
154 A.D.2d 437 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
144 A.D.2d 410, 533 N.Y.S.2d 970, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11766, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barrett-foods-corp-v-new-york-city-board-of-education-nyappdiv-1988.