Legal Opinion

Alaska Bussell Electric Co. v. Vern Hickel Construction Co.

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided July 27, 1984No. 7727/7762PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

MOORE, Justice.

Alaska Bussell Electric Company (Bus-sell) appeals the judgment of the superior court entered pursuant to the special jury verdict. The jury held that Bussell was liable to Vern Hickel Construction (Hickel) on a theory of promissory estoppel for refusing to perform according to the terms of Bussell’s bid. Hickel cross-appeals the trial court’s judgment awarding Hickel less than the requested measure of damages. We affirm.

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Bussell is an electrical subcontractor. Hickel is a general contractor. Both operate in the Anchorage area. Their dispute concerns…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Hoffman v. Red Owl Stores, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
  2. Drennan v. Star Paving Co.California Supreme Court · 1958
  3. Healey v. Catalyst Recovery of Pennsylvania, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1980
  4. James Baird Co. v. Gimbel Bros., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1933
  5. Emil Perzinski v. Chevron Chemical CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1974

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Pavel Enterprises, Inc. v. AS Johnson Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1996
  2. Glamann v. KirkAlaska Supreme Court · 2001
  3. Brady v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Murray v. FeightAlaska Supreme Court · 1987
  5. Double AA Builders, Ltd. v. Grand State Construction L.L.C.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2005

4 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