Legal Opinion

Friberg v. Elrod

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided October 17, 1930PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBean, C. J.

Section 5 of the contract provides as follows:

“The'engineer shall be the sole judge of the sufficiency of the force employed, the suitability and capacity of any plant and the quality of the work done by the contractor or his employees.”

Section 5 of the specifications, which are made a part of the contract, provides:

“All corrections of errors or omissions in the specifications or plans may be made by the engineer when such correction is necessary for the proper fulfillment of their intention as construed by him.”

Section 11 of the specifications reads as follows:

“All disputes or disagreements…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Sweeney v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  2. Sweeney v. Jackson CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1919
  3. Wallace v. American Life InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1924
  4. Mundy v. Louisville & N. R.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1895
  5. Memphis Trust Co. v. Brown-Ketchum Iron WorksCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1909

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Rueda v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1946
  2. McHorse v. Portland General Electric CompanyOregon Supreme Court · 1974
  3. Krieg v. UNION PACIFIC LAND RESOURCES CORPORATIONOregon Supreme Court · 1974
  4. Valenti v. HopkinsOregon Supreme Court · 1996
  5. State Highway Commission v. Heintz Construction Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1967

7 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