Dusenbury v. State

266 A.D. 889 | N.Y. App. Div. | 1943

*890Crapser, Heffeman and Sehenek, JJ., concur; Hill, P. J., and Bliss, J., dissent upon the ground that chapter 142 of the Laws of 1938 constituted a change in plans on the part of the State and under the contract claimant was entitled to receive the actual cost of the discarded plans.