Legal Opinion
E. A. Berman Co. v. City of Marlborough
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Decided April 22, 1981PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The plaintiff s subbid on the plumbing work for the city’s new high school was based upon its hope that no-hub pipe would be approved as an item equal to the more expensive bell and spigot pipe described in the specifications. See G. L. c. 30, § 39M(£>). The plaintiff *1010won the contract, and it then sought and obtained from the contractor and the architectural engineers, in accordance with the procedures detailed in the specifications, the approval necessary to install no-hub pipe. Notwithstanding this approval, the city thereafter refused to allow the plaintiff to use no-hub pipe and required…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- John Hetherington & Sons, Ltd. v. William Firth Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
- Green v. RichmondMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
- Interstate Engineering Corp. v. City of FitchburgMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
- The Jack Stone Company, Inc. v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1965
- Sylvania Electric Products, Inc. v. Paul L. Flanagan, D/B/A Paul L. Flanagan and SonsCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1965
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Department of Labor & Industries v. Boston Water & Sewer CommissionMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1984
- Sutton Corp. v. Metropolitan District CommissionMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1996
- Acmat Corp. v. DANIEL O'CONNELL'S SONS, INC.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1983
- E. Amanti & Sons, Inc. v. R.C. Griffin, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 2001
- D&D Enterprises, Inc. v. Malden Redevelopment AuthorityMassachusetts Superior Court · 2007
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.