Legal Opinion
L. G. Defelice Son, Inc. v. Argraves
Connecticut Superior Court
Decided November 3, 1955No. File 82631PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHouse, J.
With most commendable co-operation, counsel have agreed upon stipulations of fact which, with the admissions in pleadings, have substantially contributed to the expeditious presentation of this case upon the relatively narrow issue involved.
In brief the facts are these: In connection with the construction of a portion of the Connecticut Turnpike in Milford, authorized by part 4 of chapter 107 of the General Statutes (Cum. Sup. 1953, §§ 975c-990c), the defendant highway commissioner, acting under the authority of § 2229 of the General Statutes, advertised for bids. In the notice to prospective…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- State v. McCookSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1929
- Board of Water Commissioners v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1912
- Coombs v. LarsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1930
- Munson v. MacDonald, Highway CommissionerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1931
- Brainard v. Town of West HartfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1954
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Automatic Merchandising Corp. v. NusbaumWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
- Council 81, American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees v. State, Department of FinanceCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1972
- Ericsson GE Mobile Communications, Inc. v. Motorola Communications & Electronics, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1995
- San Jose Construction Group, Inc. v. Loudoun County School BoardLoudoun County Circuit Court · 1998