Opinion
Argued October 11, 1979
Decided November 13, 1979
Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, ARTHUR S. HIRSCH, J.
Burton S. Cooper and Sheldon Rudoff for appellant.
Allen G. Schwartz, Corporation Counsel (Lorna Bade Goodman, L. Kevin Sheridan, Joseph F. Bruno and Marian M. Schuman of counsel), for respondent.
MEMORANDUM.
The order appealed from should be affirmed, with costs. We agree with the Appellate Division that the inclusion of certain requirements in bid specifications contained in prior public contracts does not comprise an implied representation that similar requirements will be mandated with respect to subsequent contracts. The possibility that the needs and requirements of a municipality will change so as to render useless investments made in the hope that those requirements would remain constant is a normal risk of doing business which may not be shifted to the municipality by application of an estoppel theory based on no more than is alleged in this action. Nor do we find any merit in appellant's other arguments.
Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and MEYER concur in memorandum.
Order affirmed.