Legal Opinion
Bignold v. King County
Washington Supreme Court
Decided March 4, 1965No. 37276PublishedCited by 58 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHill, J.
C. W. Bignold contracted with the state of Washington (for King County) for the construction of a secondary county road. The contract was based on “unit prices” rather than on a “lump sum,” with each of the construction items having a separate unit price and quantity. The total bid was $80,024.15.
The contract called for a “cut and fill” plan of construction. The material excavated from one portion of the roadway was to be used for embankment purposes at other places. The plans called for 8,900 cubic yards of borrow-pit material to supplement the excavation material. However, a considerable…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Thorndike v. Hesperian Orchards, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1959
- State v. Northwest Magnesite Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1947
- United States v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- Benjamin Foster Co. v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1945
- Warren Bros. Roads Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1952
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by58 opinions
- Young v. YoungWashington Supreme Court · 2008
- Young v. YoungWashington Supreme Court · 2008
- Finch v. MatthewsWashington Supreme Court · 1968
- Shafer v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1974
- V. C. Edwards Contracting Co. v. Port of TacomaWashington Supreme Court · 1973
53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.