Franklin v. City of Millville
Supreme Court of New Jersey
1Opinion of the Court
Pee Cueiam.
The decision of the Supreme Court was challenged on the argument of this appeal in only two particulars — first, that the statute requiring municipal contracts for work, <fec., to an amount of over $500, to- be let by advertisement and competition, was applicable. This is now withdrawn, counsel submitting to the decision of the Supreme Court in Heston v. Atlantic City, 93 N. J. L. 317; so we have not considered the point; secondly, it is alleged 'that, in holding that the city had power to pass an ordinance for the employment of ■an engineer to- prepare plans and specifications for…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Webster v. TelleSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1928
- Penrose v. Absecon Land Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1923
- Ehlerman v. Bankers Life Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1924
- Attlin Construction, Inc. v. Muncie Community SchoolsIndiana Court of Appeals · 1980
- Leonardis v. BunnellNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1977
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.