Schofield v. School District No. 113
Supreme Court of Kansas
Appeal from Labette district court; Elmer C. Clark, judge.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Mason, J.:
L. F. Schofield entered into a written contract with the board of school district No. 113, of Labette county, to drill a well in the school yard, the purpose being to provide a *344supply of drinking water. No water suitable for the purpose was found, and by direction of the board the drilling was abandoned at the depth of 293% feet. The price agreed upon for the work was $1.25 a foot. The contractor, who had received $100, brought an action against the district for the balance of the agreed price of $1.25 a foot, also asking a further recovery…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Electric Lighting Co. of Mobile v. Elder Bros.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1896
- Hemme v. School District No. 4Supreme Court of Kansas · 1883
- Littrell v. WilcoxMontana Supreme Court · 1891
- Federal Betterment Co. v. BlaesSupreme Court of Kansas · 1907
- Omaha Consolidated Vinegar Co. v. BurnsNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Wichita Public Schools Employees Union, Local No. 513 v. SmithSupreme Court of Kansas · 1964
- Thiem v. ThomasSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1979
- Rose v. Board of Directors of School District No. 94Supreme Court of Kansas · 1947
- Franklin v. Northwest Drilling Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1974
- Kroeger v. Rural High School District No. 3Supreme Court of Kansas · 1951
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.