Creanor

City of Stockton v. Creanor

Good Law
1 Cal. Unrep. 774
Supreme Court of CaliforniaApril 30, 1873No. 3750California319 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

— The bid sent in by Myers was a bid for the entire work, and not for separate blocks, as required by the ordinance. No express contract was entered into between the city and Myers, but the street committee accepted his bid for the grading of the street along eight out of the nine blocks mentioned in the ordinance. The city charter authorizes the common council to cause the streets to be graded, and for that purpose to let contracts, etc., but this authority is not conferred upon a committee of the common council by the charter nor by ordinance, even if it be conceded that such authority may be delegated by the common council. The provision of the charter that the common council may reject all bids prohibits by implication the exercise by a committee of the power to accept a bid and award a contract. We are of the opinion that the bid must be accepted and the contract awarded by the common council.

These irregularities in respect to the bid and the award of the contract are not cured by the provisions of section 55 of the apt of 1870, to reincorporate the city of Stockton (Stats. 1869-70, p. 608), for the decision of the board of equalization is final and conclusive only in…

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.