Contracts · MBE-tested
Frank W. Molloy, Respondent, v. The City of New Rochelle, Appellant
186 N.Y. 603·New York Court of Appeals·1906·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Frank W. Molloy, Respondent, v. The City of New Rochelle, Appellant.
Molloy v. City of New Rochelle, 110 App. Div. 895, modified.
(Argued November 27, 1906;
decided December 11, 1906.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered January 5, 1906, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new tidal in an action to recover for alleged extra work in the performance of a contract.
William D. Sawyer, Corporation Counsel [Joseph T. Brown, Jr., of counsel), for appellant.
L. Laffiin Kellogg and Alfred C. Petté for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment of Trial Term modified by deducting therefrom $1,630.55, and reducing the extra allowance proportionately, and as modified affirmed, without costs in this court to either party; no opinion.
Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Edward T. Bartlett, Haigi-it, Yann and Chase, JJ. Not sitting: Willard Bartlett, J. Absent: O’Brien, J.