Case Name: In the Matter of Mansfield Contracting Corporation, Appellant, v. John V. Lindsay et al., Individually and Constituting the Board of Estimate of the City of New York, et al., Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1973-05-22
Citations: 41 A.D.2d 925
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of Mansfield Contracting Corporation, Appellant, v. John V. Lindsay et al., Individually and Constituting the Board of Estimate of the City of New York, et al., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 41
Pages: 925–926

Head Matter:
In the Matter of Mansfield Contracting Corporation, Appellant, v. John V. Lindsay et al., Individually and Constituting the Board of Estimate of the City of New York, et al., Respondents.

Opinion:
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on February 22, 1973, dismissing the petition in this article 78 proceeding in the nature of mandamus and vacating the preliminary injunction, unanimously affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. Hi affirming, we have noted the opinion on a related matter of Judge Whitman Knapp in the U. S. Court for the Southern District of New York. (See N. Y. L. J., May 4, 1973-, p. 5, col. 5.) It would seem that to relegate the petitioner-appellant to an action at law is injurious to the taxpayers in that the city does not receive the benefit of the lowest bid and may, in addition, be held in damages. However, we seem foreclosed by the decision in People ex rel. Lunney v. Campbell (72 N. Y. 496). (See, also, Lynch v. Mayor, 2 App. Div. 213; Beckwith v. City of New York, 121 App. Div. 462.) Concur— Markewich, J. P., Kupferman, Lane, Steuer and Tilzer, JJ.