Opinion
February, 1932.
Judgment affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Young, Scudder and Tompkins, JJ., concur; Lazansky, P.J., and Kapper, J., dissent on the ground that a permit to do an illegal act does not give rise to any vested right.
From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research
City of New York v. Caulwal Construction Co., Inc.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 1, 1932
235 App. Div. 682 (N.Y. App. Div. 1932)
Summaries of
City of New York v. Caulwal Construction Co., Inc.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 1, 1932
235 App. Div. 682 (N.Y. App. Div. 1932)
Case details for
City of New York v. Caulwal Construction Co., Inc.
Case Details
Full title:THE CITY OF NEW YORK, Appellant, v. CAULWAL CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.…
Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Date published: Feb 1, 1932
Citations
235 App. Div. 682 (N.Y. App. Div. 1932)
Citing Cases
Robitzek Investing Co. v. Colonial Beacon Oil Co.
Relying upon permits which defendant now challenges, plaintiff in 1939 expended large sums of money to build…