(Download) "Cecio Bros., Inc. v. Greenwich" by Supreme Court of Connecticut # Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Cecio Bros., Inc. v. Greenwich
- Author : Supreme Court of Connecticut
- Release Date : January 25, 1968
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 58 KB
Description
This case arose out of a school construction
project in Greenwich. The town of Greenwich
entered into a contract with the V. B. Construction
Company, Inc., to construct a school at
a cost of $1,707,423. The plaintiff entered into
a subcontract with the V. B. Construction Company,
Inc., hereinafter called the contractor, whereby
it agreed, for the sum of $249,000, to furnish
labor, equipment and materials in connection with
the construction of the school, including the
establishment of finished grades in accordance
with the plans and specifications of the prime
contract. The plans and specifications, including
a topographical survey, were prepared by
architects hired by the town and by an engineer
employed by the architects. On the basis
[156 Conn. 563]
of the survey and an estimate of borrow fill
requirements submitted to it by an independent
estimator whom it hired for that purpose (and who
was an employee of the engineer who was employed
by the architects for the project), the plaintiff
estimated that 39,000 cubic yards of borrow fill
would be necessary to grade the project in
accordance with the plans and specifications. In
performing its subcontract, the plaintiff
furnished more than 49,000 cubic yards of borrow
fill. The plaintiff's action to obtain
compensation for the 10,000 additional cubic
yards of borrow fill was brought against the town,
the contractor and the American Surety Company of
New York, which had given a performance bond to
the town in the amount of the prime contract. As
originally instituted, the action was one for
quantum meruit. After the town successfully
demurred to this complaint, the plaintiff amended
it to include an allegation that the town "has
been unjustly enriched in that it has received
fill from the plaintiff which cannot, in equity
and good conscience, be retained without paying
for it."