Blum v. City of Hillsboro
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtConnor T. Hansen, J.
For the purposes of this appeal, it would appear from the pleadings that the parties entered into a contract to do the work on the dam and lake for $47,438.50, and that the contract was let pursuant to the provisions of sec. 62.15, Stats.
In paragraph four of the complaint, the plaintiff alleged that after acceptance of the contract, the defendant through its mayor and council members inquired whether the plaintiff would be willing to do additional lake bottom excavation at the bid price of 40¡é per cubic yard; that the plaintiff advised he was willing to do so; and that the defendant, through…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Shulse v. City of MayvilleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1937
- Eau Claire Dells Improvement Co. v. City of Eau ClaireWisconsin Supreme Court · 1920
- Harte v. City of Eagle RiverWisconsin Supreme Court · 1970
- Lang v. City of CumberlandWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
- Thomsen-Abbott Construction Co. v. City of WausauWisconsin Supreme Court · 1960
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Fond Du Lac County v. Town of RosendaleCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1989
- Aqua-Tech, Inc. v. Como Lake Protection & Rehabilitation DistrictWisconsin Supreme Court · 1976
- Western Corrections Group, Inc. v. TierneyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2004
- Grams v. Melrose-Mindoro Joint School District No. 1Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
- City of Merrill v. Wenzel Brothers, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1979
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.