From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Arc Engineering Corp. v. State

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Nov 16, 1944
59 N.E.2d 180 (N.Y. 1944)

Opinion

Argued October 10, 1944

Decided November 16, 1944

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, DYE, J.

Nathaniel L. Goldstein, Attorney-General ( Orrin G. Judd, Ruth Toch and Saul A. Shames of counsel), for appellant.

Harry Kalman for respondent.


Claimant's failure to comply with provisions of a construction contract requiring notification of the Chief Engineer in writing before performance of work for which extra compensation was recovered in the Court of Claims is here asserted by the State as defeating any such recovery. Our examination of the record convinces us that this defense was not properly raised in the Court of Claims, where the case was tried upon another theory. No other question of law was presented for our consideration.

Accordingly the judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

LEHMAN, Ch. J., LOUGHRAN, RIPPEY, LEWIS, CONWAY, DESMOND and THACHER, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed.


Summaries of

Arc Engineering Corp. v. State

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Nov 16, 1944
59 N.E.2d 180 (N.Y. 1944)
Case details for

Arc Engineering Corp. v. State

Case Details

Full title:ARC ENGINEERING CORPORATION, Respondent, v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Nov 16, 1944

Citations

59 N.E.2d 180 (N.Y. 1944)
59 N.E.2d 180

Citing Cases

Slattery Contr. Co. v. State of N.Y

The court may presume that Mr. Di Fiore's testimony would, in the main, have corroborated the claimant's…

Shore Bridge Corp. v. State of New York

(General Construction Law, §§ 30, 31.) In the absence of qualifying testimony by the State, claimant's method…