Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

R. S. Mikesell Associates, a Co-Partnership v. Grand River Dam Authority

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided July 15, 1980No. 79-1122Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partLogan, Circuit Judge

I agree with the result reached by the majority on the 1970 contract. If I could read the 1966 contract as definitely contemplating completion of the sale of $110,000,-000 of authorized bonds within a limited time frame, I would agree with the majority’s conclusion on that contract also. But I think, in context, the 1966 contract was a long-term personal services contract, intended to bind the Authority to hire Mike-sell Associates as financial consultants when and if they were needed. As such it is not unlike a commitment to hire a particular lawyer for his or her lifetime whenever the…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Osborne v. Locke Steel Chain Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1966
  2. Arentz v. Morse Dry Dock & Repair Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1928
  3. General Paint Corporation v. KramerCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1932
  4. Beers v. New York Life InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1892
  5. Wilson v. JenningsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1962

12 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