Legal Opinion

Port of Seattle v. Puget Sound Sheet Metal Works

Washington Supreme Court

Decided March 8, 1923No. 17599PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMackintosh, J.

—In 1914, the appellant constructed a roof on' one of the buildings owned by the respond*11ent, under a contract based upon certain plans and specifications, which contained the following provision:

“33. Guaranty. Each proposal must be accompanied by a form of guaranty which must cover a period of not less than ten years, during which time the repairs must be made free of charge to the Port Commission. If the roofing is not placed by the manufacturer of the materials, the guaranty must be made jointly by the contractor and the manufacturer.”

In compliance with this requirement of. the contract,…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. MacKnight Flintic Stone Co. v. Mayor of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
  2. Cameron-Hawn Realty Co. v. . City of AlbanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1913
  3. Bush v. JonesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1906
  4. City of Lake View v. MacRitchieIllinois Supreme Court · 1890
  5. R. F. Conway Co. v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1916

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Teufel v. WienirWashington Supreme Court · 1966
  2. Shopping Center Management Co. v. RuppWashington Supreme Court · 1959
  3. Hermanson Company LLP v. Siriuspoint Specialty Insurance CorporationDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 2023
  4. Iron Gate Partners 5, Llc, V Tapio ConstructionCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2017
  5. King County, V. Walsh Construction Company Ii, Llc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2023

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

Powered by the Exa API