Legal Opinion

Burke v. Board of Improvement Paving District No. 5

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided October 25, 1915PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal from Sebastian Chancery Court; James D. Shaver, Chancellor, on exchange;

1Opinion of the CourtKirby, J.

This suit was brought by Burke Bros, for an ¡accounting and to recover the balance claimed to be due under a contract with Improvement District No-. 5 of the City of Fort .Smith, for paving the streets of said city. The contract provided for paving the roadways of all the streets of said city and the work was carried on hy them during a period of 5 or 6 years, after they had erected a brick manufacturing plant at an expense of near $150,000, in the City of Port Smith to comply with the terms of the contract in furnishing brick manufactured in Port Smith for "the work.

A great mass of testimony…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Kieburtz v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1915
  2. Soudan Planting Co. v. StevensonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1907
  3. Tedford Auto Co. v. ThomasSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1913

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Vecellio & Grogan, Inc. v. Division of HighwaysWest Virginia Court of Claims · 1992

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API