New York Court of Appeals, 1962

Caristo Construction Corp. v. Rubin

New York Court of Appeals · Decided January 25, 1962 · Desmond, Voorhis

10 N.Y.2d 538; 180 N.E.2d 794; 225 N.Y.S.2d 502; 1962 N.Y. LEXIS 1413

Cases that cite this one

4 later published cases cite this decision.

City of Opa-Locka v. Trustees of Plumbing Ind. Pro. F. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1966)
Abco Bus Co. v. Macchiarola (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1980)
Dellwood Foods, Inc. v. Board of Education (New York Supreme Court 1978)
Turnkey Construction Corp. v. City of Peekskill (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1976)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Chief Judge Desmond.

While we have doubt as to the board’s power permanently to disqualify appellants from bidding on Board of Education specifications and/or contracts, we do not construe the resolution in question as a permanent disqualification, and the Corporation Counsel indicated on the argument that it was not so intended.

Appellants are free at any time to renew their applications for prequalification based upon their past experience and performance with the Board of Education, and such other factors as may be appropriate.

The orders should be affirmed, without costs.

Dissenting Opinion

Van Voorhis, J. (dissenting).

The determination permanently disqualifying petitioners from bidding on Board of Education contracts was, in my vieAV, arbitrary and capricious for reasons stated at Special Term, and beyond the poAvers of the board. By affirming, the majority of the court is holding, in effect, that petitioners may be disqualified indefinitely but not *542permanently. That seems to me to be a distinction without a material difference. Defective work in connection with school buildings has not been laid at their doors. They have performed hundreds of millions of dollars of construction work for the Board of Education over a period of many years without fault being found respecting materials, workmanship or prices. The Board of Education even let contracts to at least one of the petitioners after the occurrence of the incident now being held to disqualify them from bidding. Neither their competence as builders nor their financial responsibility is criticized. The bids interposed on the job in question were the lowest submitted by any competitive bidder. The circumstance that they resolved the conflict resulting from tie bids in the manner in which they did, which may have been illegal, has no relation to preventing them from hereafter bidding on other jobs, which can only result in lessening the competition and increasing the costs of school construction. The orders of the Appellate Division should be reversed and the orders of Special Term reinstated.

Judges Dye, Fuld, Froessel, Burke and Foster concur with Chief Judge Desmond ; Judge Van Voorhis dissents in a separate opinion.

In each case: Order affirmed.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.