Legal Opinion

Litchfield v. City of Bridgeport

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided December 5, 1925PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKeeler, J.

The first three questions propounded for the advice of this court depend fundamentally upon the right of the city engineer to designate in the specifications for road surfacing a patented article. The first and second questions involve plaintiff’s claim that the specifications issued necessarily resulted in frustrating the clearly expressed intent of the Act that the contracts should be let to- the lowest responsible bidders. The third question involves the right generally to specify a patented article in connection with the competitive bidding. As a preliminary question plaintiff strongly…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Soon Hing v. CrowleySupreme Court of the United States · 1885
  2. Mayor of Baltimore v. FlackCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1906
  3. State v. BlakeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1897
  4. Hobart v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1868
  5. Kilvington v. City of SuperiorWisconsin Supreme Court · 1892

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Spring v. ConstantinoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1975
  2. Board of Trustees of Woodstock Academy v. Freedom of Information CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
  3. Waterbury Savings Bank v. DanaherSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1940
  4. Baker v. City of NorwalkSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1965
  5. Bahre v. HogbloomSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972

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

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

Powered by the Exa API