|
Nov-05-96 03: 14P Coleman Gledhill Hargrave 919 732 7997
<br /> r
<br /> I'.1LL TER-11,
<br /> Al-2-Em. 1,c pl:rir,tift fl-mil Cuml,r I•. �'�,rriul Jtrrlgc, at tirt!tr•rubrr 'feria.
<br /> tits ' 1113x- of 1(rr,;tr:�1u n,.. 32c1crscrl.
<br /> Tltc lrlaiutili allcgvd ill its cun,pini:tt illat it had n:ads a r,;ritt;lrt. kith
<br /> tl,r citj• of Chariot lc vvi-cring n l,eriod f,f tt•a }'tr r:s tut,ler w ltir}1 t l,e
<br /> �-` rih' :!;:reed at its o„t1 c� xnsf• to del-%t +
<br /> • I r !lu ;juc.i;r, from its Sugar
<br /> CrctfL dispn<;11 i j;u+t upt,n l,rol,7_rl� cull.trtici(Ill acrd utaiutaiucd (Iry i=
<br /> l,rds, to Iry plvridud aitd rnairttainet11 at the esperest< of the sit;; and
<br /> plaintiff a��n•,.d ttr r•OrrIV1e the shldLI fro,u the dr-ing beds after it had
<br /> been rnuditir,nr,t, as ,peci6,<l in the cvntrarl, Will to pay the city therc-
<br /> fur, tv the totlrlagr- in u slattd seLrdnlc; arld titnt the plaintiff
<br /> had goer Iv Crealt eipetiwf to put itself in pa.itivn to Carry out its part.
<br /> of the contract. It. is nlle(,ed that tllr defeirdant luunicipniitS uitltuut
<br /> H or cause, brorlc•hed its vol,travt with l,laintiff in ccrtxin parrirulats set out
<br /> in tltr r-runplaint. to tLr great dxn'llge of the pl:lint.15, whit:lc demnrids
<br /> clanln�es tl,arrfvr.
<br /> tout; The deicndxut drn,ttrred iv t}re rourplaint ulwn tLo ground that tee
<br /> cor+trlrt had brert cnlerrd int.v by ol,c city adluini.trativn and a r ubsr-
<br /> rat qucnt adminisrration i�brio cued for-its brcnrh, and the contract made
<br /> 1 r'arK
<br /> ritr uirit plaintiff, azi a matter of L•1u, \ tmLj not lee bllrdilig 11pon the
<br /> Ukh i subsequent aciministratwn of the
<br /> Pity of Charlvttr,tt! 7pon the hrarin , the.d em rr,,r
<br /> ,tYort rt1, sus taii,ed in
<br /> d plaintif a}rpenled.
<br /> core- :
<br /> Cnc%rran & .11cCfenr•yhan and James A DeLancy for pLaintrff, trp-
<br /> '� pellan.►,
<br /> Scarlulrougll and R. M. Ilvyd for dcf ufdan.t, uppe'llac.
<br /> r tlr-
<br /> from 5E twrT1., T. The drfeudant. contends that the contract before na
<br /> 1o111,t fvr cow,iderntic,,, invulvee those diNCtrtionars pm11•erR of the mnu eipal
<br /> from board wiiirj= roust be k.e.t free at. all time
<br /> goo- P , to be csr rciyed in the public
<br /> uu of
<br /> ? inrennt; and sines the purvr•rs 06ficerned are of that character, they ear,_
<br /> cite nut tat delegated, ausperidrd, Ur erttbarrasecd by contract, k hieh would
<br /> ,ct•rn- 112te it binding curer upon rucrerding boards. the plaintiff contends
<br /> %Slion that the contract involNcs ouly.the proprietary or bn8inets rowere of the
<br /> v1Ll` muuicilral corporation, and that the ncrlire invoked id a Irgitimate
<br /> ' 61• sub'
<br /> .1crt of emntrnet which rrtjg}tt extend over a.prriocl of v,.xrs. dire
<br /> "1t� doltbt, lrvivel•cr, whether a aimplc rlasy;}iration of that sort is sufficient
<br /> to ded in i it ter. question at f.4tuc, since there are enough anomalies pre
<br /> theted in either exsc to retake it an inaccurate test of the power to make
<br /> :poukl
<br /> ailrn-
<br /> the contract.
<br /> 11, ;t It'is trw% as a rule, drat where gu'•crntnrntxl dircr�-tim,ary powers are
<br /> f ctt`. u►TOJY'cd a board can make 1w evntrart which would bind its sunves;,urn
<br /> to once with respect to the exero;se of thn discretion. dtnon�?t the
<br /> Powers 1
<br /> ` 1r rs Kenrrully runc�•t,lyd to be accompanied by 8uc}t govrrnmetttat
<br />
|