Case Name: The Snare & Triest Company, Appellant, v. The City of New York, Respondent
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1922-03-07
Citations: 233 N.Y. 528
Docket Number: 
Parties: The Snare & Triest Company, Appellant, v. The City of New York, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 233
Pages: 528–529

Head Matter:
The Snare & Triest Company, Appellant, v. The City of New York, Respondent.
Contract ■—■ action to recover for alleged breach of contract for public work — extra work.
Snare & Triest Co. v. City of New York, 191 App. Div. 184, affirmed.
(Argued January 23, 1922;
decided March 7, 1922.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered April 6, 1920, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court at a Trial Term. Plaintiff entered into a contract with defendant to strengthen the end spans of the Williamsburg bridge. The work was completed and accepted by the city and plaintiff was paid the contract price. This action was to recover for an alleged breach of said contract in that plaintiff was compelled to do work not properly within the terms of its contract. The Appellate Division held that if the work and materials for which claim is made were not called for by the con tract, then they must be regarded as extra work and the provisions of the contract with relation to the payments for extra work become operative and govern the same. If the work was covered by the contract, then there can be no recovery.
John C. Wait and Howard G. Wilson for appellant.
John P. O’Brien, Corporation Counsel (John F. O’Brien and Willard S. Allen of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion:
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Hogan, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane and Andrews, JJ. Not voting: His cock, Ch. J., and Cardozo, J.