§Why CasetextPricing

Manuel De La Cruz, et al., Appellants,v.Caddell Dry Dock & Repair Co., Inc., et al., Respondents.

Brief

50 Cited authorities

  1. Universities Research Assn. v. Coutu

    450 U.S. 754 (1981)   Cited 309 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the DBA “does not confer a private right of action for back wages under a contract that administratively has been determined not to call for Davis–Bacon work,” but declining to decide “whether the Act creates an implied private right of action to enforce a contract that contains specific [DBA] stipulations”

  2. Lantry v. State

    2005 N.Y. Slip Op. 9573 (N.Y. 2005)   Cited 68 times
    In Lantry v. State of New York, 6 NY3d 49 (2005), the Court of Appeals outlined the procedure whereby the Commissioner of the New York State Department of Labor sets the prevailing rate for workers on State and local public works projects (except in New York City, where it is the responsibility of the Comptroller).

  3. McManus v. Board of Educ

    87 N.Y.2d 183 (N.Y. 1995)   Cited 52 times
    In McManus, while not disturbing its prior holding in Roberts that "Jarema" credit did not apply to administrative or supervisory personnel, the New York Court of Appeals distinguished between cases where an administrator filled a vacant position, and cases where the administrator merely acted as a substitute, by "taking over a position on behalf of another who is either temporarily unable to perform the duties on a short-term basis because of sickness, leave of absence or similar reasons."

  4. Cruz v. Caddell Dry Dock Repair Co., Inc.

    22 A.D.3d 404 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)   Cited 26 times

    6315. October 25, 2005. Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Barry Salman, J.), entered April 7, 2004, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, dismissed the remaining causes of action (second through sixth) of the complaint, unanimously modified, on the law, the second and sixth causes of action reinstated, and otherwise affirmed, without costs, and the matter remanded for further proceedings. Barnes Iaccarino Virginia Ambinder Shepherd, PLLC, New York (Dennis M. Cariello of counsel)

  5. Erie County Industrial Development Agency v. Roberts

    94 A.D.2d 532 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)   Cited 57 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a project is not publicly financed when "[t]he public involvement concerns only the creation of the economic conditions and incentives which will encourage and foster this type of private development"

  6. Matter of Cerie County Indus. Development v. Roberts

    63 N.Y.2d 810 (N.Y. 1984)   Cited 43 times   1 Legal Analyses

    Argued September 11, 1984 Decided October 9, 1984 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department, Norman E. Joslin, J. Robert Abrams, Attorney-General ( John Q. Driscoll, Peter H. Schiff and Peter B. Sullivan of counsel), for appellant. James L. Magavern, Susan C. Goldberg, Marianne E. Hanley and Francis W. Gruene for respondents. Frank S. Kedzielawa for intervenor-respondent, precluded. Robert H. Basso for Empire State Chapter of Associated Builders and

  7. Action Elec. Contrs. Co. v. Goldin

    64 N.Y.2d 213 (N.Y. 1984)   Cited 42 times
    In Action Electrical Contractors Co. v. Goldin, 64 N.Y.2d 213, 222 (1984), the Court of Appeals held that "[s]upplements may be provided by cash payments equal to the cost of providing the prevailing supplements, a combination of cash and benefits, or by an equivalent benefits plan."

  8. Regal Indus. Corp. v. Crum and Forster

    2005 Pa. Super. 425 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2005)   Cited 11 times
    Defining a speaking demurrer as one which requires the aid of a fact not appearing on the face of the pleading being objected to and noting a speaking demurrer cannot be considered in sustaining a preliminary objections

  9. Williamson v. Town of Parish

    139 A.D.2d 97 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)   Cited 24 times

    July 7, 1988 Appeal from the Supreme Court, Oswego County, Donald H. Miller, J. Seiter Genant (Thomas A. Reynolds of counsel), for appellant. Sumner Auser (Wallace Van C. Auser, III, of counsel), for respondent. BALIO, J. Plaintiff Williamson commenced this action to recover damages for additional costs incurred in connection with work performed on a public contract to repair a roof on defendant's highway garage. The complaint asserted two causes of action: breach of contract and unjust enrichment

  10. Title Guaranty Trust Co. v. Crane Co.

    219 U.S. 24 (1910)   Cited 96 times
    In Title Guaranty Co. v. Crane Co., supra, a question arose as to the propriety of allowing a docket fee to each claimant.

  11. Section 3131 - Bonds of contractors of public buildings or works

    40 U.S.C. § 3131   Cited 676 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Requiring government contractors to possess both performance and payment bonds

  12. Section 137 - Bond to secure payment of certain claims arising from a public improvement; enforcement

    N.Y. State Fin. Law § 137   Cited 169 times
    Mandating that public entities "require ... a bond guaranteeing prompt payment of moneys due to all persons furnishing labor or materials to the contractor"

  13. Section 3142 - Rate of wages for laborers and mechanics

    40 U.S.C. § 3142   Cited 126 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Explaining the calculation of overtime pay “under any federal law”

  14. Section 2 - Definitions

    N.Y. Nav. Law § 2   Cited 52 times

    The following terms when used in this chapter unless otherwise expressly stated, or unless the context of the language or subject matter indicates a different meaning or application was intended, shall be deemed to mean and include: 1. "Office" shall mean the state office of parks, recreation and historic preservation. 2. "Commissioner" shall mean the commissioner of parks, recreation and historic preservation, unless otherwise indicated, except that for purposes of the administration of articles

  15. Section 290.210 - Definitions

    Mo. Rev. Stat. § 290.210   Cited 31 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Defining the term "construction" in the context of the Prevailing Wage Act

  16. Section 220-G - Additional enforcement of article

    N.Y. Lab. Law § 220-G   Cited 21 times

    For the purpose of enforcing this article, the affected employee may bring an action to recover from the bond which is required by section one hundred thirty-seven of the state finance law, of the contractor, the subcontractor or both, unpaid wages and supplements, including interest as provided for in subdivision eight of section two hundred twenty of this article, due to persons furnishing labor to either the contractor or subcontractor. Said action may be brought against the contractor, the subcontractor

  17. Section 55 - Stairways and passageways

    N.Y. Nav. Law § 55

    1. Every public vessel certified to carry passengers shall be provided with (a) permanent stairways and other sufficient and safe means convenient for passing from one deck to the other, and (b) passageways large enough to allow persons freely to pass, which shall be open fore and aft of the length of the vessel, and to and along the railings, which shall be functional, unobstructed and passable whenever the vessel is engaged in carrying passengers. 2. In addition to any other requirement imposed

  18. Section 54 - Construction against fire

    N.Y. Nav. Law § 54

    All public vessels shall be so constructed that inflammable material about any machinery or apparatus involving danger of fire where such inflammable material is exposed to ignition, shall be shielded by some incombustible material so that the air may circulate freely between such material and the ignitable substances. Before granting a certificate of inspection, the inspector shall require that all necessary provisions be made throughout such vessel as he may judge expedient to guard against loss

  19. Section 61 - Repairs and modifications

    N.Y. Nav. Law § 61

    1. Before any repair or modification is made to the structure or engineering plant of a public vessel, or any repair or modification is made that may affect the stability, seaworthiness or safe operation of a public vessel, or in the event that the owner of a public vessel becomes aware of any such repair or modification, the owner shall notify the inspector of the repair or modification or proposed repair or modification in writing. The inspector shall be authorized to determine whether a proposed