This site is a developmental version of Wiki Law School. To go to the production site: www.wikilawschool.org
Allhusen v. Caristo Construction: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
-- | -- | ||
Kroo completed the painting. However, Caristo refused to pay Allhusen. | Kroo completed the painting. However, Caristo refused to pay Allhusen $11,650 ([https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=US%2411650+%281952+US+dollars%29 about $132,000 in 2023]). | ||
|procedural_history=Allhusen sued Caristo for the money due to Kroo's performance of painting. | |||
|issues=Can parties limit the freedom of assignability in specific contracts? | |issues=Can parties limit the freedom of assignability in specific contracts? | ||
|arguments=Caristo argued that it didn't have to pay Allhusen because of the anti-assignment provision in the contract between Caristo & Kroo. | |||
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | |case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | ||
|link=https://casetext.com/case/allhusen-v-caristo-constr-corp | |link=https://casetext.com/case/allhusen-v-caristo-constr-corp | ||
Revision as of 20:20, July 20, 2023
| Allhusen v. Caristo Construction | |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals of New York |
|---|---|
| Citation | 103 N.E.2d 891 |
| Date decided | January 24, 1952 |
Facts
Caristo Construction Corporation ("Caristo"), a general contractor, entered into a sub-contract with Kroo Painting ("Kroo"). Caristo hired Kroo for a painting job in New York City public schools. Their contract prohibited Kroo from assigning any part of the contract to another party unless Caristo provided express written consent.
Nevertheless, Kroo assigned its sub-contract to Marine Midland First Company of New York which in turn assigns its sub-contract to Mr. Allhusen ("Allhusen").
--
Kroo completed the painting. However, Caristo refused to pay Allhusen $11,650 (about $132,000 in 2023).Procedural History
Allhusen sued Caristo for the money due to Kroo's performance of painting.
Issues
Can parties limit the freedom of assignability in specific contracts?
Arguments
Caristo argued that it didn't have to pay Allhusen because of the anti-assignment provision in the contract between Caristo & Kroo.
Case Text Links
- Summary at CaseText
- Video summary at Quimbee
- Case text at Leagle
- Case Brief at lawschoolcasebriefs.net
