Legal Opinion
Smith v. Pinner
Arizona Supreme Court
Decided December 20, 1948No. Nos. 4954, 4961PublishedCited by 26 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GORDON FARLEY, Superior Judge.
This action arose out of a contract which the federal government awarded to Arthur Pinner, Jr., on October 10, 1942, to construct army air fields near Douglas, Arizona. Pinner as prime contractor entered into a subcontract with T. J. Smith, who in turn subcontracted with a coadventure comprised of himself, W. M. Tenney and L. N. Tenney. The coadventure of SmithTenney proceeded with the construction of the air fields and had completed about 88 per cent of the work when the difficulties ensued which resulted in this litigation.
Pinner became dissatisfied with the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Rice v. TissawArizona Supreme Court · 1941
- Julian v. CarpenterArizona Supreme Court · 1947
- Spain v. GriffithArizona Supreme Court · 1933
- Kunselman v. Southern Pacific RailroadArizona Supreme Court · 1928
- Daniel v. City of TucsonArizona Supreme Court · 1938
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- In Re North American Coin & Currency, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
- Edgar T. Weekes v. Atlantic National Ins. Co., California State Auto Association v. Atlantic National Ins. Co., Atlantic National Ins. Co. v. California State Auto AssociationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1966
- Adams v. DionArizona Supreme Court · 1973
- Higgins v. KittlesonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1965
- Neochem Corp. v. Behring International, Inc. (In Re Behring International, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas · 1986
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.