Whitsett

Metropolitan Water District of Southern California v. Whitsett

Good Law
1932 Cal. LEXIS 428·215 Cal. 400·10 P.2d 751
Supreme Court of CaliforniaApril 18, 1932Docket No. L.A. 13498.California7,024 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Shenk, J.

This is an application for a writ of mandate to compel the respondent, as chairman of the board of directors of the petitioner district, to sign a contract for the construction of Entrance Hill Road, located in Riverside County, and to be used in conjunction with the Colorado River aqueduct.

After notice inviting proposals, the contract was duly awarded to Martin Bros. Trucking Company. The particular work to be performed is the construction of about 6.45 miles of graded road, involving approximately 44,000 cubic yards of excavation, with appurtenant metal pipe culverts, concrete protection walls and related work.

The respondent has refused to sign the contract because the petitioner did not ascertain, and specify in its notice inviting proposals and insert in the contract, the general prevailing rate of per diem wages in the locality in which the work is to be performed for each! craft or type of workman or mechanic needed to execute the contract, as required by the provisions of an act passed by the legislature and approved by the Governor in 1931. (Stats. 1931, p. 910.) This enactment is referred to as the Public Wage Rate Act of 1931.

Section 1 of the( act provides: “Not…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.