Peet v. City of East Grand Forks
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Polk county to recover $3,173.13. The facts are stated in the opinion. The case was tried before Watts, J., •who made findings and ordered judgment in favor of plaintiff for the .amount demanded. Defendant’s motion to amend the findings of fact was denied. From the judgment entered pursuant thereto defendant appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
The facts in this case, so far as here material, are as follows: In 1902, one P. PI. Thornton entered into a contract with the city of East 'Grand Forks for grading, macadamizing, and curbing certain of its .streets. The contract covered five separate pieces of work and provided that each should be regarded as imposing separate obligations upon Thornton, independent of and without reference to any other part of the work. The trial court construed the writing, and no exception •thereto is taken by either party, as constituting five separate contracts. 'Contract No. 3, as designated in the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co. v. RichardsIllinois Supreme Court · 1894
- Canal Co. v. GordonSupreme Court of the United States · 1868
- San Francisco Bridge Co. v. Dumbarton Land & Improvement Co.California Supreme Court · 1897
- Dyer v. Middle Kittitas Irrigation DistrictWashington Supreme Court · 1901
- Robson v. BohnSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1880
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- REI Transport, Inc. v. C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2008
- Stark v. MagnusonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1942
- Farmers State Bank of Madelia, Inc. v. BurnsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1942
- Palmer v. Watson Construction Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1963
- Franconi v. GrahamOregon Supreme Court · 1918
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.