Legal Opinion
Carl Bolander & Sons Co. v. City of Minneapolis
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided February 2, 1990No. C4-88-2383PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KEITH, Justice.
The question in this case is whether a bid on a public construction contract, which did not include the name of a potential women-owned subcontractor for five percent of the total value of the contract as required by the specifications, rendered the bid materially nonresponsive. The trial court found the contract, as bid, valid and enforceable. The court of appeals reversed. We affirm the court of appeals.
The material facts are not in dispute. On August 25, 1988, the City of Minneapolis through its Park & Recreation Board (Board) invited public bids for a contract for…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Griswold v. County of RamseySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
- Telephone Associates, Inc. v. St. Louis County BoardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
- Leo Michuda & Son Co. v. Metropolitan Sanitary DistrictAppellate Court of Illinois · 1981
- Rossetti Contracting Co. v. BrennanCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1974
- Gale v. City of St. PaulSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1959
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- In Re Carl Corp. v. State, Department of EducationHawaii Supreme Court · 1997
- Byrd v. Independent School District No. 194Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1993
- Sayer v. Minnesota Department of TransportationSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
- Lovering-Johnson, Inc. v. City of Prior LakeCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1997
- Sayer v. Minnesota Department of TransportationCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2009
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.