Vaughan v. County of Tulare
California Court of Appeal
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.
On July 15, 1918, the defendant entered into a written contract with White & Gaskill, copartners, for the construction of the Woodlake-Visalia division of a system of paved public highways in said county of Tulare. To the plaintiff, by consent of the board of supervisors, this contract was regularly assigned. The work was begun on August 22, 1918, and the entire division was completed and opened on April 22, 1919. It seems unnecessary to set out the terms of the contract further than will hereafter appear. Payments were made from time to time to respondent as the work progressed, and on May…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- People v. MilnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- American-Hawaiian Engineering & Construction Co. v. ButlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- City St. Improvement Co. v. City of MarysvilleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- Hatton v. GreggCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1906
- Harrison v. HendersonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1903
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Universal Sales Corp. v. California Press Manufacturing Co.California Supreme Court · 1942
- Neel v. Mannings, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1942
- Ethel D. Co. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
- MacPherson v. West Coast Transit Co.California Court of Appeal · 1928
- Noble v. Kertz & Sons Feed & Fuel Co.California Court of Appeal · 1945
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.