Nash v. City of St. Paul

• Decision Date: 01 January 1866
• Citation: 11 Minn. 110
• Parties: PATRICK NASH vs. THE CITY OF ST. PAUL.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

Page 110

11 Minn. 110

PATRICK NASHvs.

THE CITY OF ST. PAUL.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

Appeal from judgment of district court, Ramsey County.

Action for breach of a contract to grade Bench Street. The contract was for grading that street from Jackson to Wabashaw Street. As alleged by the answer, the advertisement by the street commissioners was for grading Bench Street, the work to be let in two separate contracts, one for the work between Jackson and Robert to be finished Oct. 1, and one for the work between Robert and Wabashaw, to be finished May 1.

Smith & Gilman, for appellant.

H. J. Horn and I. V. D. Heard, for respondent.

WILSON, C. J.

The plaintiff, in his complaint, alleges that the defendant is a municipal corporation, and "that on and before the 13th day of July, 1857, and until April 1st, 1858, A. L. Larpenteur, Norman W. Kittson, and William B. McGrorty, were the duly elected and qualified, and acting street commissioners of the second ward of the said City of St. Paul, under and by virtue of the said charter and the amendatory acts thereof then in force; that the said Larpenteur, Kittson, and McGrorty, acting in their official capacity as such street commissioners and by the authority vested in them as such street commissioners by said charter, and the acts amendatory thereof, then in force having prior to the 5th day of August, 1857, determined to grade Bench street in said ward between Jackson and Wabashaw streets, advertised for bids for doing the same. In pursuance whereof the plaintiff made the lowest bid for doing said job, and said street commissioners having awarded the contract therefor to the plaintiff as the lowest bidder upon said bid made by him for doing said job, the said street commissioners entered into a written contract under seal, with the said plaintiff for the said grading of Bench street as follows, to-wit, pursuant to said bid." The plaintiff then sets out the contract, alleges performance on his part, and a failure on part of the defendant to pay the sum due thereon, and demands judgment. The defendant, among other defenses, alleges in the answer, "that the said street commissioners some time prior to the 13th day of July, 1857, determined and ordered the grading of said Bench street in manner following, and not otherwise, to-wit: From the levee to Wabashaw street, to be let under two separate contracts; that part of the work between Jackson and Robert streets to be completed by the first of October then next, and street certificates to be issued to the contractor for such part upon the completion of the same; and that part between Robert and Wabashaw streets, to be completed by the 1st of May then next, and certificates as aforesaid issued to the contractor of that part last aforesaid upon the completion of such part. That in pursuance thereof the said street commissioners gave notice of the time and place of letting said work by publishing such notice in the official newspaper of said city, as follows, to-wit: `To contractors: — Sealed proposals will be received by the street commissioners of the second ward, at their office, until noon, Wednesday, the twenty-second day of July, for the following work, viz.: To grade Bench street from the levee to Wabashaw; the work will be let under two separate contracts; that part of the work between Jackson and Robert streets, to be completed by...