Burrell v. City of Portland
Oregon Supreme Court
From Multnomah: Calvin U. Gantenbein, Judge. Statement by Mr. Justice Bean. This is a suit by W. F. Burrell against the City of Portland, to declare illegal and. to enjoin the further execution of two contracts, one between the City of Portland and defendant Ralph Modjeski for drawing plans and supervising the construction of a bridge over the Willamette River, and the other between the city and the Union Bridge & Construction Company for the building of the substructure of…
Read the full summary
From Multnomah: Calvin U. Gantenbein, Judge. Statement by Mr. Justice Bean. This is a suit by W. F. Burrell against the City of Portland, to declare illegal and. to enjoin the further execution of two contracts, one between the City of Portland and defendant Ralph Modjeski for drawing plans and supervising the construction of a bridge over the Willamette River, and the other between the city and the Union Bridge & Construction Company for the building of the substructure of such bridge, and the bond given for the faithful- performance thereof. The trial court sustained a general demurrer to…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Bean
The gravamen of the complaint, as we understand it, is that the proceedings are void for the reason that it was illegal for the municipality to employ a consulting engineer, invite bids, and execute a contract based upon plans and specifications made by such engineer. Section 304 of the charter of the City of Portland provides in part as follows:
“The city engineer shall keep himself informed of the condition of all public streets, squares, parks, grounds, highways, bridges, sewers and street lights, and all plans and specifications for the construction, improvement or repairs thereof shall be…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Spring Valley Water Works v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Kiernan v. PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1910
- Anderson v. Public SchoolsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Avery v. JobOregon Supreme Court · 1894
- People ex rel.Corkhill v. McAdooAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1904
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Rorick v. Dalles CityOregon Supreme Court · 1932
- Rowland v. HayesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1938
- Harrington v. City of PortlandDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1988
- Irwin v. Klamath CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1919