Legal Opinion

United State,s v. Griffith, Gornall & Carman, Inc

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided March 11, 1954No. 4704PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PICKETT, Circuit Judge.

Griffith, Gornall & Carman, Inc., a Utah corporation, herein referred to as plaintiff, was engaged in the business of doing construction work. During the year 1951, it entered into a contract with the City of Clearfield, Utah, to lay a concrete water pipe line for a consideration of $43,000.00. The installation crossed lands adjacent to Hill Field, an Air Base operated by the United States Air Force. On Hill Field was a large area which was hard-surfaced from which water drained during rainfall. On October 3 and 4, 1951, there was a heavy rain and the drainage…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Story Parchment Co. v. Paterson Parchment Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1931
  2. Eastman Kodak Co. v. Southern Photo Materials Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1927
  3. Palmer v. Connecticut Railway & Lighting Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
  4. Kobe, Inc. v. Dempsey Pump Co. Dempsey Pump Co. v. Kobe, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1952
  5. Hoffer Oil Corporation v. CarpenterCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1929

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

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Malloy v. MonahanCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1996
  2. Roberts v. Holland & HartColorado Court of Appeals · 1993
  3. Oiness v. Walgreen Co.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
  4. First Security Bank of Utah, N.A. v. J.B.J. Feedyards, Inc.Utah Supreme Court · 1982
  5. International Ground Transportation v. Mayor and City Council of Ocean City, MarylandCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2007

27 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