Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Thompkins v. Fuller

Montana Supreme Court

Decided July 21, 1983No. 82-396Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Sheehy

I concur (1) the Commissioner has exclusive power to determine the standard prevailing rates of wages under the State’s statutes; (2) that “work of a similar character” refers to projects and not to types of labor; (3) that the Stam “Survey” was inadmissible; and (4) that no attorney’s fees should be awarded. Otherwise, I put as much distance as possible between me and everything else that is said in the majority opinion.

It is easy to expose the sophistry of the majority. One need only ask, “If Yellow Bay Laboratory were a federal project, would Thompkins have had to pay Davis-Bacon…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Valier Co. v. StateMontana Supreme Court · 1950
  2. Associated General Contractors v. StateSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1973

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API