Reports of Cases Heard And Determined in the Appellate Division ..., volume 77
Reports of Cases Heard And Determined in the Appellate Division ..., volume 77
New York (State). Supreme Court. Appellate Division, Marcus Tullius Hun, Jerome B. Fisher, Austin B. Griffin
The book Reports of Cases Heard And Determined in the Appellate Division ..., volume 77 was written by author New York (State). Supreme Court. Appellate Division, Marcus Tullius Hun, Jerome B. Fisher, Austin B. Griffin Here you can read free online of Reports of Cases Heard And Determined in the Appellate Division ..., volume 77 book, rate and share your impressions in comments. If you don't know what to write, just answer the question: Why is Reports of Cases Heard And Determined in the Appellate Division ..., volume 77 a good or bad book?
What reading level is Reports of Cases Heard And Determined in the Appellate Division ..., volume 77 book?
To quickly assess the difficulty of the text, read a short excerpt:
Ineorporatian in a pMic eontraet of unconstitutional proviHonB of the Labor Law — its execution not e^foined (U the suit of a taxpayer — general aUegations of ftaud not admitted by a demurrer — provision requiring material of a particular kind and that the contractor shtM have had a plant in operation for a year. The fact that provisions of the Labor Law (Laws of 1897, chap. 415, as amd.),. inserted pursuant to a mandate of the Legislature in a contract made between the commissioners of the New... East River Bridge and a steel company for the- construction of the approaches to such bridge, have, since the execution of the contract, been declared unconstitutional by the Court of Appeals, does not entitle a taxpayer of the city of New York to an injunction restraining the execution of such contract, especially when it appears that, at the time such contract was made, the Appellate Division had decided that the provisions in question were properly inserted therein, and when il also appears that there is no allegation in the complaint that the contractor has refused to comply with any of the conditions of the contract on the ground of their unconstitutionality.
User Reviews: