Legal Opinion · Dissent

Wunderlich v. State Highway Commission

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided November 14, 1938No. 33248Published

1DissentEthridge, J.

I am unable to agree with the proposition that the Highway Commission is liable for any damages for breach of contract. The appellant must resort to coercive measures, such as mandamus. I will state my position more fully.

Martin Wunderlich, complainant in the court below, filed a bill in the Chancery Court aguinst the State Highway Commission, seeking to recover certain deductions made by the Highway Commission for engineering and maintenance, charged under its contract for supervision of the work beyond the stipulated time for its completion under the contract, and for damages for failure of…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Yazoo M.V.R. Co. v. SideboardMississippi Supreme Court · 1931
  2. Parker v. State Highway CommissionMississippi Supreme Court · 1935
  3. State v. WoodruffMississippi Supreme Court · 1933
  4. State Highway Commission v. GullyMississippi Supreme Court · 1933
  5. May Bros. v. DoggettMississippi Supreme Court · 1929

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API