Legal Opinion

Cannavino & Shea, Inc. v. Water Works Supply Corp.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided March 7, 1972PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBraucher, J.

This action of contract is before us on the plaintiff’s exception to the allowance of the defendant’s motion for a directed verdict. The trial judge stated that “there was never any acceptance by” the plaintiff. We summarize the evidence most favorable to the plaintiff.

The town of Springfield, Vermont (the town), issued a “Contract Document for Furnishing and Laying Water Mains” and called for bids to be opened at 2 p.m. on May 8, 1970. The general specifications in the contract document required that butterfly valves have “operators . . . of the enclosed worm gear type,” but this requirement…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Kuzmeskus v. Pickup Motor Co. Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1953
  2. Union Tank Car Company v. Wheat BrothersUtah Supreme Court · 1964
  3. Crane Co. v. PARK CONSTRUCTION CO. INC.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1969
  4. Mellen v. JohnsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1948

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Kuwaiti Danish Computer Co. v. Digital Equipment Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2003
  2. Loranger Construction Corp. v. E. F. Hauserman Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1978
  3. Loranger Construction Corp. v. E. F. Hauserman Co.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1978
  4. A & a Mechanical, Inc. v. Thermal Equipment Sales, Inc.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1999
  5. Gilbert & Bennett Manufacturing Co. v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1977

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API