City of Cincinnati v. Baumer

Hamilton Circuit Court

City of Cincinnati v. Baumer

12 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 240, 1908 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 268

DecidedJune 13, 1908

StatusPublished

This text of 12 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 240 (City of Cincinnati v. Baumer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Hamilton Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

City of Cincinnati v. Baumer, 12 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 240, 1908 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 268 (Ohio Super. Ct. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

The bond in suit is statutory (See. 1536-553 R. S.), and in determining its effect reference should be had to the statute which authorizes its execution and prescribes its objects. Secrist et al v. Barbee & Royston, 17 O. S., 426.

The damages could be easily ascertained in two ways, either by reletting the contract to the next lowest and best bidder, or by readvertising and reletting to .the lowest and best bidder. The commissioners of water works in the exercise of the discretion conferred by statute relet the contract to the next lowest and best bidder -at a loss of more than twice the amount of the bond, and there is nothing in the record showing any abuse of discretion, or 'that a readvertisement would have resulted in loss to the city.

Judgment reversed and judgment for plaintiff in error.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The bond in suit is statutory (See. 1536-553 R. S.), and in determining its effect reference should be had to the statute which authorizes its execution and prescribes its objects. Secrist et al v. Barbee & Royston, 17 O. S., 426.

The damages could be easily ascertained in two ways, either by reletting the contract to the next lowest and best bidder, or by readvertising and reletting to .the lowest and best bidder. The commissioners of water works in the exercise of the discretion conferred by statute relet the contract to the next lowest and best bidder -at a loss of more than twice the amount of the bond, and there is nothing in the record showing any abuse of discretion, or 'that a readvertisement would have resulted in loss to the city.

Judgment reversed and judgment for plaintiff in error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 240, 1908 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 268, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-cincinnati-v-baumer-ohcircthamilton-1908.