Legal Opinion
Dahl v. Edwin Moss & Son, Inc.
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided November 15, 1949PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMaltbie, C. J.
This is an action arising out of contract wherein the plaintiff, an electrical contractor, seeks damages from the defendant, a general contractor, for material and labor which he furnished and which he claims were not called for by the contract. The complaint is in two counts. In the first, the plaintiff seeks to recover extra expenses to which he was put because he was required to install an underfloor duct of a type not called for in the contract and specifications and because of a claimed change in the plan of procedure in which the work was to be done. In the second count, recovery is…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Blakeslee v. Board of Water CommissionersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
- Whitaker v. Cannon Mills Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1945
- Connecticut Co. v. New York, New Haven & Hartford RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1919
- George S. Chatfield Co. v. O'NeillSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1915
- Clover Manufacturing Co. v. Austin Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1924
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- State National Bank v. DickSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1973
- Thermoglaze, Inc. v. Morningside Gardens Co.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1991
- John T. Brady & Co. v. City of StamfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- Skolnick & Sons v. HeymanConnecticut Appellate Court · 1986
- Grenier v. Compratt Construction Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.