Rushlight Automatic Sprinkler Co. v. City of Portland
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtRossman, J.
This is an appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court which (1) held that the defendants had no right to the sum of $21,472.21 which the plaintiff deposited with the City of Portland, one of the defendants-appellants, concurrently with the submission of a proposal made by the plaintiff for the construction of a city sewer; (2) decreed that the plaintiff is entitled to judgment against the City in the amount of $21,472.21; and (3) ordered the other defendants-appellants to pursue the course requisite to the return to the plaintiff of the money just mentioned.
The plaintiff, which is a…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Moffett, Hodgkins & Clarke Co. v. RochesterSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
- Steinmeyer v. SchroeppelIllinois Supreme Court · 1907
- Wheaton Building & Lumber Co. v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1910
- St. Nicholas Church v. KroppSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
- Frederich v. Union Electric Light & Power Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1935
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Gardner v. MeilingOregon Supreme Court · 1977
- Mayor of Baltimore v. DeLuca-Davis Construction Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1956
- Wheeler v. White Rock Bottling Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1961
- State Highway Commission v. State Construction Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1955
- Springer v. Powder Power Tool Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1960
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.