Depot Construction Corp. v. City of New York

New York Court of Appeals

Depot Construction Corp. v. City of New York

387 N.E.2d 222, 46 N.Y.2d 859, 414 N.Y.S.2d 511, 1979 N.Y. LEXIS 1817

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedFebruary 6, 1979

StatusPublished

Cited by12 cases

This text of 387 N.E.2d 222 (Depot Construction Corp. v. City of New York) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Depot Construction Corp. v. City of New York, 387 N.E.2d 222, 46 N.Y.2d 859, 414 N.Y.S.2d 511, 1979 N.Y. LEXIS 1817 (N.Y. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The orders of the Appellate Division should bé affirmed, with costs, on the opinion of Mr. Justice Samuel J. Silver-man in that court.

We add only two comments. First, as recited in section 100-a of the General Municipal Law, the provisions of sections 101 and 103 of that law (prescribing practice with reference to the expenditure of municipal funds for public projects) are designed "to assure the prudent and economical use of public moneys for the benefit of all the inhabitants of the state and to facilitate the acquisition of facilities and commodities of maximum quality at the lowest possible cost”. They do not undertake to define the rights and liabilities between the municipality and other participants in the public project. They are for the protection of taxpayers, not the benefit of contractors.

Second, even if it be assumed that the complaint and supporting documents are sufficient to sustain appellants’ contention that the co-operatives were agents of the City of New York in the development of these meat distribution centers, we agree with the Appellate Division that in each of these cases the contract between the co-operative and the contractor imposed liability only on the co-operative.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler and Fuchsberg concur.

In each case: Order affirmed, with costs in a memorandum.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The orders of the Appellate Division should bé affirmed, with costs, on the opinion of Mr. Justice Samuel J. Silver-man in that court.

We add only two comments. First, as recited in section 100-a of the General Municipal Law, the provisions of sections 101 and 103 of that law (prescribing practice with reference to the expenditure of municipal funds for public projects) are designed "to assure the prudent and economical use of public moneys for the benefit of all the inhabitants of the state and to facilitate the acquisition of facilities and commodities of maximum quality at the lowest possible cost”. They do not undertake to define the rights and liabilities between the municipality and other participants in the public project. They are for the protection of taxpayers, not the benefit of contractors.

Second, even if it be assumed that the complaint and supporting documents are sufficient to sustain appellants’ contention that the co-operatives were agents of the City of New York in the development of these meat distribution centers, we agree with the Appellate Division that in each of these cases the contract between the co-operative and the contractor imposed liability only on the co-operative.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler and Fuchsberg concur.

In each case: Order affirmed, with costs in a memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

387 N.E.2d 222, 46 N.Y.2d 859, 414 N.Y.S.2d 511, 1979 N.Y. LEXIS 1817, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/depot-construction-corp-v-city-of-new-york-ny-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack