Bentley v. State
Wisconsin Supreme Court
ACTION against tile state, commenced in the supreme court pursuant to ch. 139. R. S. The following statement of the case was prepared by Mr. Justice Cassoday: Ch. 252, Laws of 1882, went into effect March 31, 1882, and authorized the construction of two transverse wings to the state capitol,— one on the north, and the other on the south,— to be built by contractors according to the plans and specifications therein provided for, and under the superintendence of an architect…
Read the full summary
ACTION against tile state, commenced in the supreme court pursuant to ch. 139. R. S. The following statement of the case was prepared by Mr. Justice Cassoday: Ch. 252, Laws of 1882, went into effect March 31, 1882, and authorized the construction of two transverse wings to the state capitol,— one on the north, and the other on the south,— to be built by contractors according to the plans and specifications therein provided for, and under the superintendence of an architect or superintendent therein authorized ; the bid or bids therefor not to exceed, in the aggregate, $100,000 payable in…
1Opinion of the CourtCassoday, J.
The only question raised by the demurrer is whether the complaint above set forth states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action upon contract. The contract was only to be let after the state, through its board of commissioners, had procured and adopted “suitable and proper plans, drawings, and specifications ” for the construction of the two wings of the capítol. Sec. 3, ch. 252, Laws of 1882. Such commissioners were expressly “ authorized to employ an architect or superintendent to superintend the work on said building as it progressed,” and for which he was to receive from the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Kellogg Bridge Co. v. HamiltonSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Schwartz v. SaundersIllinois Supreme Court · 1867
- Clark v. PopeIllinois Supreme Court · 1873
- Grand Rapids & Bay City Railroad v. Van DusenMichigan Supreme Court · 1874
- Burke v. DunbarMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by36 opinions
- Thomas Lonergan v. San Antonio Trust Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1907
- MacKnight Flintic Stone Co. v. Mayor of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
- Hammaker v. SchleighCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1929
- Fidelity And Deposit Company Of Maryland v. City Of Sheboygan FallsCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1983
- State v. Commercial Casualty InsuranceNebraska Supreme Court · 1933
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.