Case Name: Ingalls Stone Company, Appellant, v. State of New York, Respondent
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1918-03-26
Citations: 223 N.Y. 600
Docket Number: 
Parties: Ingalls Stone Company, Appellant, v. State of New York, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 223
Pages: 600–601

Head Matter:
Ingalls Stone Company, Appellant, v. State of New York, Respondent.
Ingalls-Stone Co. v. State of New York, 178 App. Div. 942, affirmed.
(Argued March 12, 1918;
decided March 26, 1918.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered May 31, 1917, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant, entered upon a decision of the Court of Claims, dismissing upon the merits a claim filed by the plaintiff herein. The claimant, a sub-contractor, sought to recover from the State of New York the sum of $1,770.58, with interest thereupon from February 5, 1908, that amount being the alleged value of stone furnished to a certain corporation which in 1907 had entered into a contract with the state of New York for the construction of a building at the New York School of Agriculture at St. Lawrence University, Canton, N. Y. Plaintiff not having received payment for the stone furnished filed a notice of lien against the. amount due the primary contractor. Another lienor thereafter commenced foreclosure proceedings and judgment was entered determining the priority of the liens and directing payment thereof “or so much thereof as said funds properly applicable thereto will pay of the same ” out of certain moneys due and to become due from the state of New York. From the evidence on trial of plaintiff’s claim it appeared that' after the primary contractor had defaulted under the contract the state re-advertised and re-let the work pursuant to the terms of the agreement. Upon the completion of the building it was found that the balance which had remained unpaid at the time the original contractor had forfeited the contract had been expended and there existed a deficit in' the fund applicable to the construction of said building.
Charles H. Hitchcock for appellant.
Merton E. Lewis, Attorney-General (Edmund H. Lewis of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion:
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Hiscock, Ch. J., Chase, Hogan, Cardozo,. Pound, McLaughlin and Andrews, JJ.