v0755-461

3ln tl^ Imteit States

dtrrutt Olourt of Appeals

For iiit Nitttli Cdtrrutt

1. 1. WILL JORGENSEN,

Plaintiff in Error,

vs.

) No. 2121

COUNTY OF TUOLUMNE, a Mimicipalj

Corporation of the State of California,

Defendant in Error.

REPLY BRIEF OF PLAINTIFF IN ERROR.

The construction put upon the contract by

defendant in error is unreasonable, and unfair

to plaintiff, and utterly ignores several es-

sential stipulations of the contract.

The contract called not alone for the construction

of a bridge for the price stipulated. It called for

the construction of a bridge "of the dimensions

shown on the plans." (Transcript pp. 67, 62 and

63.)

The construction of the contract for which de-

fendant in error contends entirely ignores and

3

---

archive.org Volume Name: govuscourtsca9briefs0755

Volume: http://archive.org/stream/govuscourtsca9briefs0755

Document Link: http://archive.org/stream/govuscourtsca9briefs0755#page/n460/mode/1up

Top Keywords (auto-generated):

contract, work, plans, county, bedrock, depth, bridge, cal, section, midstream, contractors, provision, pier, extra, supp

Top Key Phrases (auto-generated):

additional work, san francisco, midstream pier, york 63, section 4075, section 4073, salt lake, proposed work, extra compensation, 4075 pol., rauss 82, political code, milwaukee 98, lake 83, harms 108,

Document Status: UGLY