Jackson v. State York
| Decision Date | 24 November 1925 |
| Citation | 150 N.E. 556,241 N.Y. 563 |
| Parties | Percy JACKSON, as Trustee in Bankruptcy of United Engineering & Contracting Company, Respondent, v. STATE of New York, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (205 N. Y. S. 658, 210 App. Div. 115), entered July 1, 1924, modifying, and affirming, as modified, a judgment entered upon a decision of the Court of Claims. The claim was for the value of work done by plaintiff contracting company under a contract with the state for the construction of a section of the Barge canal from the city of Lockport to Sulphur Springs lock. The Appellate Division reversed the conclusion of law of the Court of Claims, to the effect that the respondent was not entitled to recover for the increased cost of excavating material along a stretch of 4,450 feet of the site of the canal under the contract, the character of which material by the contract plans was represented to be such as could be readily, easily, and cheaply excavated, when, in fact, the state's own investigations, not disclosed to the respondent, had shown that the material was hard, compact, and difficult to excavate, and that the respondent was not entitled to interest on certain items of work performed under the contract, at contract prices, recovery of the principal of which was not disputed by the state.
Albert Ottinger, Atty. Gen. (Albert J. Danaher, of Albany, of counsel), for the State.
Franklin Nevins, Abram J. Rose, Asa B. Kellogg, and T. Tileston Wells, all of New York City, for respondent.
Judgment affirmed, with costs, on opinion of HUBBS, P. J., below.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Greenfield v. Heckenbach
... ... Id. at 628-29. Plaintiffs sued BP in federal court for antitrust violations as well as state law claims for breach of contract, fraud, and deceit. Id. at 624. The jury found in favor of BP ... representations not embodied in the contract, excludes this case from the scope of the Jackson, Angerosa, Bridger and Crowell-Collier cases ( supra ). (See Foundation Co. v. State of New ... In this regard, we agree with the position taken by the New York Court of Appeals in Jackson v. State: ... A party to a contract cannot, by misrepresentation of ... ...
-
Martens Chevrolet, Inc. v. Seney
... ... of the matter by that court, primarily to clarify seeming confusion in the law of this State concerning the existence of an action for negligent misrepresentation. 3 ... For ... In this regard, we agree with the position taken by the New York Court of Appeals in Jackson v. State: ... A party to a contract cannot, by misrepresentation of a ... ...
-
Clark v. City of Humansville
...in case he spoke at all, was bound to disclose the real fact." Jackson v. State, 210 App.Div. 115, 205 N.Y.S. 658, 662, affirmed 241 N.Y. 563, 150 N.E. 556. In determining the sufficiency of plaintiffs' petition, we accept their specific averments that they relied upon the quoted misreprese......
-
A. Teichert & Son, Inc. v. State
...v. United States, 248 U.S. 132, 136-137, 39 S.Ct. 59, 63 L.Ed. 166; Jackson v. State, 210 App.Div. 115, 205 N.Y.S. 658, affd. 241 N.Y. 563, 150 N.E. 556.) Viewed by such abstract standards, the first five counts of plaintiff's pleadings are deficient. They do not allege facts to demonstrate......