People v. Holbert

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that “imaginative financial schemes, including giving tax exemptions to a project, [does] not transform an essentially private venture into a public one”
• holding that a housing development project was not a public work contract because the structure was not for public use, was not owned by the public, was not open to the public, and was not intended for public enjoyment
• Labor Law § 220 held not to apply to construction of low and moderate income housing on private property, because there was \no public use of the structure . . . no public access and no public enjoyment\ of the project

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).