J. P. Duffy Co. v. Board of Education of Central High School District No. 3

255 A.D. 493, 8 N.Y.S.2d 245, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4785
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 16, 1938
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 255 A.D. 493 (J. P. Duffy Co. v. Board of Education of Central High School District No. 3) 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
J. P. Duffy Co. v. Board of Education of Central High School District No. 3, 255 A.D. 493, 8 N.Y.S.2d 245, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4785 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1938).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The action is by subcontractors upon a bond given by the National Surety Corporation and others under a contract between WilHam Kennedy Construction Co., Inc., and the defendant Board of Education of the Central High School, District No. 3, Town of Hempstead, for the erection of a high school. The contract stipulated that the contractor should provide a bond “ guaranteeing to said owner the faithful performance of the terms, covenants and conditions of the contract, and in addition thereto guaranteeing the full payment to all subcontractors, and for all labor, materials and equipment.”

In accordance with the contract the bond upon which this action is maintained provides that if the principal shall faithfully perform this contract according to its terms, covenants and conditions, and in addition thereto pay in full all subcontractors and for all labor, materials and equipment, then this obligation shall be null and void, otherwise to remain in full force and effect.”

The question presented is whether the plaintiffs can maintain the action as third party beneficiaries on the bond which was exacted by the school board and which runs to the board as the sole obligee. We think that question is answered by the following decisions, which hold that under the circumstances of the present case such an action cannot be maintained: Eastern Steel Co. v. Globe Indemnity Co. (185 App. Div. 695; 186 id. 892; affd., 227 N. Y. 586); Fosmire v. National Surety Co. (229 id. 44); Buffalo Cement Co. v. McNaughton (90 Hun, 74; affd. on opinion below, 156 N. Y. 702); Van Clief & Sons, Inc., v. City of New York (141 Misc. 216).

The order should be reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and motion for judgment on the pleadings and to dismiss the supplemental complaints granted.

Present — Martin, P. J., O’Malley, Townley, Glennon and Untermyer, JJ.

Order unanimously reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion for judgment on the pleadings and to dismiss the supplemental complaints granted.

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

Related

Stainless, Inc. v. Employers Fire Insurance
69 A.D.2d 27 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)
J & J Tile Co. v. Feinstein
43 A.D.2d 529 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1973)
York Corp. v. 1955 Associates, Inc.
20 A.D.2d 538 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1963)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
255 A.D. 493, 8 N.Y.S.2d 245, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4785, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/j-p-duffy-co-v-board-of-education-of-central-high-school-district-no-3-nyappdiv-1938.