New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1888-12-23
A LONG-STANDING CASE.
IT HAS FIGURED IN MANY CoURna
JOHN BRADY FIGHTING THE CITY FOE MoNEH
ALLEGED TO BE DUE FOE GRADING

The litigation in relation TO the case OF John Brady,
the contractor against the city for money claimed to
be due for work done in connection WIN reguiauhg
and grading Ninety-ffth-st. under the contract
awarded 10 him on unbalanced bids when hubert ".
THOMPSON was Commissioner Of Public Works, was
again before Justice Trnax In the superior court
Special Term yesterday. The original bid by Brady
Amounted IN sIs 600 but he afterward made claim
for over sI2o,oO0 and recovered judgments against
tho city for all except 100000, which IS claimed
in suit now pending by his assignee bernaru DrnJ
The increase OF the amount claimed over the OH
is claimed to be due TO the fact that the Cty surveyor
made mistake In estimating the relative quah"'cs" VI
Garth end rock to be taken out Brady Do 70 cuoo
ward for earth and only fourth Of cent per cubic
yard for rock excavation. The Surveyor In malnnS
his estimate upon the contract, made nearly thc eho
amount rock excavation whereas upon excavation ~
proved to be nearly all earth excaVauoh uPo" WIZ"
Brady claimed his ss per cubic yard
Tho case has been before the courts nom ume 70
time in different phases, in the efforts OF mo corpora
ton Counsel defeat the claim il has oeeh 'nousa
the Superior Court, Special and General Terms ana
tbrouoh the Court of Appeals, in the efforts OF tho
Corporation Counsel to obtain new trial on newly
discovered evidence In regard 10 two judgments oo-
talned by Brady against the city and paid. On hess
prceedugs the city was represented by Roscoe Conk
ling and I'm all OF them Unsuccessful
In January last Justice Dugro of the superior
Court, granted an injunction csHdihihh "~
Brady John Brady and Others from prosecuting
their actions against the city the ground OF fraun'
and restatng all the charges that had been previously
made In June the defendants made motion oefofs
Justice Truax to vacate the Injunction on the gouha
that the defendants not guilty of fraud IN oo-
tanning the contract the judgments. Amda'ius
were then presented to the Court denying iraud'
The Court referred the case 10 Gilbert ~ speir, lE'
TO determine certain facts In relation to the raud.
Mr. Speir found that the defendant. John Brady, od
not frauduently prevent the officers OF the piaintn
from learning the facts with regard to the WORK
TO be done under the Ninety-nfthst. contract that
he did not inspire with any empoye Of the plalnuh
or with any other person 10 defraud the palnilh IN
obtaining the contract and that he did not procure
by fraudulent or corrupt the award OF the con-
tract to himself
The case was before Justice Truax yesterday on
the motion of the defendants TO confirm the referees
report and 30 dissolve the Injunction and also upon
a demurrer TO the complaint on the ground that No
former adiudIcaOns in the case were conclusive upon
the plaintiff and that It could not be heard again IN
the same court. IL was. claimed by David ): Dean,
Assistant Corporation Counsel on behalf or the CITY,
that there was sufficient I'm the testimony TO warrant
an inference of fraud on the part OF Brany. .
The defendants represented by l.. Lanln heI-
logg who cOntended that there not the slightest
proof of fraud. The Judge reserved his decision