Legal Opinion
B. Mifflin Hood Co. v. Lichter
District Court, E.D. Tennessee
Decided November 22, 1950No. Civ. No. 550PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DARR, Chief Judge.
The plaintiff sues the defendant for a balance of $15,954.62 alleged to be due for concrete masonry blocks furnished by the plaintiff to the defendant as materials to be used in the construction of dwelling units at the townsite of the Clinton Engineering Works at Elza, Anderson County, Tennessee, being a part of the Oak Ridge Project. The defendant was subcontractor for the erection of the said dwelling units under the prime contractor, O’Driscoll & Groves,Inc., who was operating under a negotiated contract with the United States.
The complaint is based on orders entered by…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Fire Ins. Assn., Ltd. v. WickhamSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Hines v. WillcoxTennessee Supreme Court · 1896
- McGannon v. FarrellTennessee Supreme Court · 1919
- Hibernia Bank & Trust Co. v. BoydTennessee Supreme Court · 1932
- Work v. Associated Almond Growers of Paso RoblesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Arcata Graphics Co. v. Heidelberg Harris, Inc.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 1993
- Cole v. HendersonCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1969
- Jacob Lichter and Jennie Lichter, D/B/A the Southern Fireproofing Company v. B. Mifflin Hood CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1952