Mansfield & Sandusky City Rail Road v. John P. Veeder & Co.
Ohio Supreme Court
This is a Bill in Chancery, reserved in Erie County, The bill is brought to enforce the specific performance ’of a contract, by compelling the defendant to accept a conveyance of real estate..
Read the full summary
This is a Bill in Chancery, reserved in Erie County, The bill is brought to enforce the specific performance ’of a contract, by compelling the defendant to accept a conveyance of real estate.. The plaintiff is constructing a Rail Road from Richland county to Sandusky ; the defendants are contractors, and the contracts, so far as they bear upon this case, are as follows : “This agreement, made the 6th day of February, A. D. 1844, by and between the Mansfield and Sandusky City Rail Road Company, by Burr Higgins, their agent and general superintendent, of the Northern Division of said Company’s…
1Opinion of the Court
Birchard, C.
J. A preliminary question necessarily arising upon the exceptions to the report of the special Master is, how far conclusive is the decision of the Company’s engineer ? In the original reference, the Master was required to adopt as conclusive, the estimate of the Company’s engineer as to the quantity and quality of the work unless fraud be shown, or mistake, or undue influence, or want of good faith, such as is the subject of relief by the ordinary principles of Chancery. From a careful consideration of the various clauses of the contract, it seems to us that both parties…
2Cited by15 opinions
- McArthur v. ScottSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Stewart v. OnealCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1916
- Miller's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1886
- President and Fellows of Harvard College v. JewettCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1925
- Chaffin v. DixonOhio Court of Appeals · 1920
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.