Elliott Contracting Co. v. City of Portland
Oregon Supreme Court
From Multnomah: William N. Gatens, Judge. Department 1. By an agreement attached to its complaint and made part thereof the plaintiff, as contractor, covenanted with the City of Portland “that the contractor, for the consideration hereinafter named, does hereby agree to furnish all material and perform all of the labor necessary or required for the construction and full completion of the macadam pavement and all necessary trenches for storm water drains on that portion of…
Read the full summary
From Multnomah: William N. Gatens, Judge. Department 1. By an agreement attached to its complaint and made part thereof the plaintiff, as contractor, covenanted with the City of Portland “that the contractor, for the consideration hereinafter named, does hereby agree to furnish all material and perform all of the labor necessary or required for the construction and full completion of the macadam pavement and all necessary trenches for storm water drains on that portion of the Hillside Parkway from Hamilton Avenue entrance to Sheridan Street, in full compliance with the plans and…
1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.
1. The argument against the com' plaint is that the pleader does not state that the engineer was actuated by fraud or had excluded items due the plaintiff to such -an extent as to indicate bad faith. In the first place we note that not all of the contract is before us in that the terms of the specifications alluded to are not stated. Aside from that the exhibit attached to the complaint embodies the stipulation of the parties. It is said in that pleading that as part of the consideration of the contract the defendant agreed to furnish certain rock at a certain rate. This allegation cannot…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Sutherlin v. BloomerOregon Supreme Court · 1907
- Nelson Bennett Co. v. Twin Falls Land & Water Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1908
- Boston Store v. SchleuterSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1908
- Muir v. MorrisOregon Supreme Court · 1916
- Fire Ass'n v. AllesinaOregon Supreme Court · 1904
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Marks v. Twohy Bros.Oregon Supreme Court · 1921
- Mayer v. East Side Logging Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1929
- O'Neil v. Twohy Bros.Oregon Supreme Court · 1920
- JA La Porte Corporation v. Mayor and City CouncilDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1936
- McHorse v. Portland General Electric CompanyOregon Supreme Court · 1974
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.