Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ray Bell Construction Co. v. School District

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Decided October 7, 1996No. 2571Published

1Dissent

CURETON, Judge:

(dissenting).

I respectfully dissent from the majority’s opinion. First, I would hold that the bid of M.B. Kahn Construction Company, Inc. (“Kahn”) violates the applicable statutes. Second, I would hold that the School District of Greenville County (“District”) had no authority to waive this violation. Finally, I would remand the case to the hearing officer.

I

Ray Bell Construction Company, Inc. (“Bell”) contends that Kahn’s bid is unresponsive on its face because it violates the South Carolina Consolidated Procurement Code (“Procurement Code”). The Procurement Code sets forth a…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Southern California Acoustics Co. v. C. V. Holder, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1969
  2. Meadowbrook Carting Co. v. Borough of Island HeightsSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1994
  3. Romero Excavation & Trucking, Inc. v. Bradley Construction Inc.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1996
  4. AT & T Technologies, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1989
  5. Prismatic Dev. v. Somerset CountyNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1989

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API