Idaho Supreme Court· 7/25/1968

Grant Construction Co. v. Burns

Citations

443 P.2d 1005
92 Idaho 408
1968 Ida. LEXIS 312

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that if the breach of a contractual duty was a risk that the contractor “did not contractually agree to assume, or which was not within the contemplation of the parties,” damages should not be limited to the defined amount
an order to a contractor to proceed in the face of the contractee's failure to schedule removal of utility facilities constituted interference
where delay results from causes not within the contemplation of the parties or, where delay is caused by active or direct interference by contractee, “no damage” provision of contract need not be adhered to
“where . . . the state has entered into a contract pursuant to legislative authorization, the state has consented to be sued for alleged breaches of its contractual responsibilities and cannot invoke the protection of sovereign immunity”
“[W]here, as here, the state has entered into a contract pursuant to legislative authorization, the state has consented to be sued for alleged breaches of its contractual responsibilities and cannot invoke the protection of sovereign immunity. ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Smith, Taylor, McFadden, Spear, McQuade

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

38 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

25 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.