Legal Opinion

Acmat Corp. v. DANIEL O'CONNELL'S SONS, INC.

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided November 1, 1983PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPerretta, J.

The defendant general contractor, Daniel O’Connell’s Sons, Inc. (O’Connell), entered into a contract with the third-party defendant, city of Springfield (city), for the construction of a school. The plaintiff subcontractor, Acmat Corporation (Acmat), was to perform the special interior coating work, which it proposed to do with Spray-don, an acoustical coating material different from that called for in the contract specifications, namely Cafco Soundshield. The architect, however, decided that Spray-don was not the equal of Cafco, and he would not approve its use. Acmat performed its work…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Marlow v. City of New BedfordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1976
  2. Palmer v. ClarkMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1871
  3. Quintin Vespa Co. Inc. v. Construction Service Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1962
  4. Albre Marble & Tile Co. Inc. v. John Bowen Co. Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1959
  5. John F. Miller Co. v. George Fichera Construction Corp.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1979

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. J. A. Sullivan Corp. v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1986
  2. Dehnert v. Arrow Sprinklers, Inc.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Sutton Corp. v. Metropolitan District CommissionMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1996
  4. Cambridge Street Metal Co. v. CorraoMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1991
  5. Vranos v. SkinnerMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2010

3 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