Legal Opinion

City of Bridgeport v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided July 30, 1926PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, C. J.

We consider first the denial of the motion to set aside the verdict. The following facts are either admitted or undisputed: In August, 1915, the city of Bridgeport caused to be prepared plans and specifications for a completed drawbridge to be constructed across the Pequonnock River in Bridgeport. Its six parts comprised substructure, fixed span substructures, movable span substructures, operators’ and comfort houses, approaches, removal of existing structures, and dredging channel. These plans and specifications were submitted to Empire Construction Company, hereinafter called the Empire…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Moses v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  2. Conner v. . ReevesNew York Court of Appeals · 1886
  3. Bridgeport Fire & Marine Insurance v. WilsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1866
  4. Belknap v. GleasonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1836
  5. Commonwealth v. Fidelity & Deposit Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Kaplan v. Merberg Wrecking CorporationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1965
  2. Advest, Inc. v. WachtelSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
  3. Beach v. BeachSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1954
  4. Associated Engineers & Contractors, Inc. v. StateHawaii Supreme Court · 1977
  5. Raymond-Dravo-Langenfelder v. Microdot, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1977

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