Legal Opinion

Hyde v. City of Santa Cruz

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 27, 1931No. Docket No. 7803PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

GRAY, J., pro tem.

Respondent, by a written agreement, employed appellant to design a sewerage and sewerage disposal works, to prepare all drawings and the contract for its construction and to supervise and inspect" such construction for a percentage of its cost, payable in progress installments, subject to final determination thirty-five days after completion. Although providing that time was "of its essence, the agreement did not limit the time for perform'ance of these services except as to require appellant to begin the engineering work on a specified date and to furnish the designs,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Chung Kee v. DavidsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
  2. Mannix v. TryonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  3. Uhlhorn v. GoodmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  4. Pettibone v. Lake View Town CompanyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  5. Town of Decatur v. JaudonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1911

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Harm v. FrasherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960

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

Powered by the Exa API