I. Janvey & Sons, Inc. v. County of Nassau
Cases that cite this one
9 later published cases cite this decision.
- Terraferma Electrical Construction Co. v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2006)
- Sodexho Management, Inc. v. Nassau Health Care Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
- Acme Bus Corp. v. Board of Education (N.Y. 1997)
- Acme Bus Corp. v. Board of Education of the Roosevelt Union Free School District (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
- Baumann & Sons Buses, Inc. v. Patchogue-Medford Union Free School District (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1996)
- William A. Gross Construction Associates, Inc. v. Gotbaum (New York Supreme Court 1991)
- Conduit & Foundation Corp. v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority (N.Y. 1985)
- Maross Construction, Inc. v. Central New York Regional Transportation Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1985)
- Conduit & Foundation Corp. v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1985)
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
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, and the judgment of Special Term reinstated.
It was petitioner’s burden to establish that the contract had been improperly awarded to Halbro. The petition charged that Halbro’s bid failed to include required spectrophotometer prints and that its products did not meet performance standards. The papers submitted to Special Term established, however, that Halbro submitted prints as required by the bid notice and failed to indicate in what respects its products did not meet the bid specifications. Moreover, the bids having been solicited on the basis of Johnson products “or equal,” and petitioner having submitted bids for Johnson products, the conclusory statement of the county’s buyer that petitioner was the only vendor meeting specifications was not binding on the commissioner and was not sufficient to meet petitioner’s burden.
Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Meyer, Simons and Kaye concur.
Order reversed, with costs, and judgment of Supreme Court, Nassau County, reinstated in a memorandum.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.