Peluso v. Commissioners of City of Hoboken
| Decision Date | 10 August 1923 |
| Citation | 126 A. 623 |
| Parties | PELUSO v. COMMISSIONERS OF CITY OF HOBOKEN. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Certiorari by Peter A. Peluso to review award of contract to another by the Commissioners of the City of Hoboken. Award set aside.
Merritt Lane, of Newark, for prosecutor.
John J. Fallon, of Hoboken, for defendants.
An award of a contract was made to James J. McFeely for the collection of ashes, garbage, etc., and the removal thereof, from the city of Hoboken to the township of North Bergen, N. J. The contract was for $486,260. It is to run for the term of five years, commencing on August 14, 1923. The award is attacked by Peter A. Peluso, the prosecutor and lowest bidder, whose bid was $476,580. The statute under which the award was made is Pamph L. 1917, p. 409, § 4, art. 23, and Pamph, L. 1920, p. 572. These statutes provide that the contract is to be entered into and made with "the lowest responsible bidder or bidders." The question, therefore, for solution is: Who is the lowest responsible bidder? This, in turn, is to be decided from the testimony submitted. The commissioners, before making the award on July 31, 1923, gave the bidder, Peter A. Peluso, a hearing. He was sworn before the commissioners, and other testimony was taken. This procedure was approved in Kelly v. Freeholders of Essex, 90 N. J. Law, 411, 101 A. 422. The testimony so taken and considered by the commissioners was, by consent of the respective attorneys, returned with the writ, and used on the hearing of the case. From this testimony the commissioners found and decided, to use the language of the award, that said Petqr A. Peluso is not a "responsible bidder, notwithstanding he is the lowest bidder." This is a question of fact.
Mr. Justice Swayze remarked, in the case of Harrington's Sons Co. v. Mayor, etc., Jersey City, 78 N. J. Law, 612, 75 A. 943:
"It is a simple matter to determine the single question of fact whether the lowest bidder is responsible."
This finding of the commissioners will not be disturbed by a reviewing court unless it appears that the action was taken in bad faith, or the proofs were of such a character as to satisfy reasonable men of the bidder's responsibility. Schwitzer v. Board of Education, 79 N. J. Law, 342, 75 A. 447. "Responsible" means ability to meet obligations. It involves accountability, i. e., answerable.
The testimony demonstrates the fact that the bidder, Peter A. Peluso, has the necessary equipment and financial...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Asbury Park Press v. City of Asbury Park
...122 A. 741 (E. & A.1923); Sellitto v. Cedar Grove, 132 N.J.L. 29, 33, 38 A.id 185 (Sup.Ct.1944); cf. Peluso v. Commissioners of City of Hoboken, 98 N.J.L. 706, 708, 126 A. 623 (Sup.Ct.1923); Barber Asphalt Pav. Co. v. City of Trenton, 74 N.J.L. 430, 432, 65 A. 873 (Sup.Ct.1907); Araneo-Whit......
-
Arthur Venneri Co. v. Housing Authority of City of Paterson, A--88
...Paterson Contracting Co. v. City of Hackensack, 99 N.J.L. 260, 263, 264, 122 A. 741 (E. & A.1923); Peluso v. Commissioners of City of Hoboken, 98 N.J.L. 706, 708, 126 A. 623 (Sup.Ct.1923), it may also involve the moral integrity of the bidder. Picone v. City of New York, 176 Misc. 967, 29 N......
-
Sellitto v. Grove Tp.
...his ability to account, and to answer for his undertaking. Schwitzer v. Board of Education, 79 N.J.L. 342, 75 A. 447; Peluso v. Hoboken, 98 N.J.L. 706, 126 A. 623; Peter's Garage, Inc. v. Burlington, 121 N.J.L. 523, 527, 3 A.2d 634, affirmed 123 N.J.L. 227, 8 A.2d 910. A finding that one is......
-
Murdock Contracting Co. v. Borough of Verona
...his ability to account, and to answer for his undertaking. Schwitzer v. Board of Education, 79 N.J.L. 342, 75 A. 447; Peluso v. Hoboken, 98 N.J.L. 706, 126 A. 623; Peter's Garage, Inc., v. Burlington, 121 N.J.L. 523, 527, 3 A.2d 634, affirmed 123 N.J.L. 227, 8 A.2d 910. A finding that one i......