City St. Improvement Co. v. City of Marysville
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Bishop, Wheeler & Hoefler, William Rix, and Richard Belcher, for Appellant.
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
This action was brought to recover the sum of $4,000.07, the balance alleged to be due plaintiff from defendant for labor done and materials furnished in the construction of a portion of a sewer system for the city, under a written contract, a portion of the demand being for extra work. The total contract price, including extra work amounting to $2,940.16, was $33,731.29, of which defendant had paid plaintiff $29,731.22. Defendant claimed that plaintiff had not .performed and had refused to perform the contract according to its terms, and on this ground resisted payment of the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Laycock v. ParkerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
- Williams v. Chicago, Santa Fe & California Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1892
- Ashland Lime, Salt & Cement Co. v. ShoresWisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
- Wildey v. Fractional School District Number OneMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
- Schliess v. City of Grand RapidsMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Connell v. HigginsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
- American-Hawaiian Engineering & Construction Co. v. ButlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- State Highway Department v. MacDougald Construction Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1939
- California Sugar & White Pine Agency v. PenoyarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
- Gray v. CottonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.