Legal Opinion

City of Ashland v. Hunt-Forbes Const. Co.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)

Decided March 27, 1936PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion op the Court by

Judge Richardson

Affirming.

The same facts and questions of law are involved in these two appeals and for this reason we shall dispose of them in one opinion.

The city of Ashland, by appropriate ordinances, the regularity of which is not here questioned, ordered the improvement of designated streets at the exclusive cost of the owners of the abutting property, as authorized by section 3096, Kentucky Statutes. The construction of the improvement was let, as provided by statute, to the lowest and best bidder. The Hunt-Forbes Construction Company being such, it entered into a…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Forbes v. City of AshlandCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1932
  2. City of Covington v. McKennaCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1932
  3. City of Providence v. Southern Roads Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1932

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. City of Ashland v. Brown's Adm'rCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1942
  2. Hunt-Forbes Construction Co. v. City of AshlandCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1936

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

Powered by the Exa API