Legal Opinion
Columbia Gas Const. Co. v. Holbrook
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided February 6, 1936No. 6877PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SIMONS, Circuit Judge.
The appellant’s grievance is that the court below construed a written contract when by the plain meaning of its terms construction was not required, and that, even if ambiguous, its construction was erroneous.
The Ashland Construction Company, as contractor, undertook to dig and back fill a trench for a 20-inch high pressure gas line being constructed by the Columbia Company for a distance of 18 or more miles through rough and hilly country from Right Beaver, Ky., to Pikeville, Ky. Its agreed compensation was 96 cents per lineal foot. After the completion of the work and…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Marx v. American Malting Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1909
- Canadian Nat. Ry. Co. v. George M. Jones Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1928
- Corbett v. Winston Elkhorn Coal Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1924
- Norton Iron Works v. Standard Slag Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1926
- Sampliner v. Maryland Casualty Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1933
3Cited by13 opinions
- Continental Bank & Trust Company v. StewartUtah Supreme Court · 1955
- Johnson v. Igleheart Bros.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1938
- Consolidated Jewelers, Inc. v. Standard Financial CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1963
- Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1946
- Jones v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 1951
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.