M.J. Sheridan & Son Co. v. Seminole Pipeline Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• additional costs incurred by company that contracted to construct pipeline were no evidence of reasonable value of work performed
• additional costs incurred by company that contracted to construct pipeline were no evidence of reasonable value of work performed
• no evidence supported the reasonable value of the work performed by construction contractor when supporting calculations “represented damages for breach of contract, not for quantum meruit”
• no evidence supported the reasonable value of the work performed by construction contractor when supporting calculations “represented damages for breach of contract, not for quantum meruit”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).