Majority
Headnote
1. New York (city of)-consolidation act-Laws 1888, chat. 410, § 64— Contract tor work, etc., on public buildings.This was an action upon a contract for damages, tried by consent without a jury.
The department of public parks had awarded to the plaintiff as the lowest bidder under section 64 of the consolidation act, chapter 410, Laws of 1882, a contract for the construction and materials of a public building in a public park. By the contract, the wood to be used in the first floor, was pine. The plaintiff was to receive for all the work and materials $29,740. Before the wood for the first floor was furnished or any work done upon it in the building, the department, or the officers composing it, con
Section 64 commands that when any work is necessary to be done to complete or perfect a particular job, and the several parts of the work shall involve the expenditure of more than $1,000, the same shall be by contract, which shall be awarded to the lowest bidder upon proposals to be made as provided in the section.
An important question in this case is, did the furnishing and putting in this cherry wood involve an expenditure of more than $1,000 for it ? It is certain that it involved an expenditure of more than $975; because a part of the consideration to the plaintiff was that he was to receive the whole amount fixed by the contract as if he furnished pine and the work upon it, and yet he was released from the obligation of furnishing pine. The - city was to pay the value of the pine in addition to the estimate of $975. There was no finding as to the value of the pine material, but as there was a finding that the value of furnishing pine and work upon it, as required by the contract was about $325, it sufficiently appears in the case that the pine material was worth more than twenty-five dollars. As in my judgment the work in question involved an expenditure of more than $1,000, the contract for it was in violation of the statute, as it was not made with the lowest bidder, after the publication of proposals, as required by the statute.
There are other serious questions in the case, but what has been already said, requires the reversal of the judgment.
Judgment reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event.
Freedman and Teuax, JJ., concur.