Contracts · MBE-tested
Eugene Lentilhon, Appellant, v. The City of New York, Respondent
185 N.Y. 549·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
Eugene Lentilhon, Appellant, v. The City of New York, Respondent.
Lentilhon v. City of New York, 102 App. Div. 548, affirmed.
(Argued April 20, 1906;
decided May 8, 1906.)
Appeal from a judgment entered April 1, 1905, upon an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, overruling plaintiff’s exceptions ordered to be heard by the Appellate Division in the first instance, and directing the dismissal of the complaint in an action to recover for excess work and Tor delays occasioned by defendant in the prosecution of work on a municipal contract.
L. Laflin Kellogg and Alfred G. Petté for appellant.
John J. Delany, Corporation Counsel (Theodore Connoly and Terence Farley of counsel), for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur : Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Haight, Vann, Willard Bartlett and Chase, JJ. Not voting: Edward T. Bartlett, J.