Manerud v. City of Eugene
Oregon Supreme Court
From Lane: Lawrence T. Harris, Judge. Statement by Mr. Justice Burnett. This is an action by Sam Manerud and Edward Quinn, copartners as Manerud & Quinn, against the city of Eugene. It is admitted by the parties that the contract mentioned in the complaint was entered into between the plaintiffs’ assignor and the city of Eugene.
Read the full summary
From Lane: Lawrence T. Harris, Judge. Statement by Mr. Justice Burnett. This is an action by Sam Manerud and Edward Quinn, copartners as Manerud & Quinn, against the city of Eugene. It is admitted by the parties that the contract mentioned in the complaint was entered into between the plaintiffs’ assignor and the city of Eugene. The material parts of that contract and the specifications alluded to therein are here set out: “That the said contractor, in consideration of the covenants, agreements and payments hereinafter mentioned to be performed and made by the said city, hereby covenants and…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Burnett
There are fifty-one assignments of error noted in the abstract. It is impossible within the limits of an ordinary opinion and, considering the nature of some of them, unprofitable, to examine all these alleged errors. The essence of plaintiffs’ grievance, as stated, is that the city entirely failed to comply with part of its contract and was dilatory in what it did perform. Without going into the elaborate detail which would be necessary in a minute consideration of the plaintiff’s numerous objections, we must content ourselves with some general observations upon the construction proper to be…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Rickerson v. . Hartford Fire Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1896
- Holmes v. WhitakerOregon Supreme Court · 1892
- Lindley v. First National BankSupreme Court of Iowa · 1889
- Hendricks v. Middlebrooks Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1903
- Robinson v. New York & Texas Steamship Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1901
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Psaty & Fuhrman, Inc. v. Housing AuthoritySupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1949
- Ericksen v. Edmonds School District No. 15Washington Supreme Court · 1942
- McGuire & Hester v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
- Hawley v. Orange County Flood Control DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
- West v. Coos CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1925
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.