Cullen v. Rock County

10 Citing cases

  1. Akin v. Kewaskum Community Schools

    64 Wis. 2d 154 (Wis. 1974)   Cited 8 times
    In Akin v. Kewaskum Community Schools, 64 Wis.2d 154; 159, 160, 218 N.W.2d 494 (1974), the court held: "`The writ [temporary injunction] is to a great extent a preventative remedy; and where the parties are in dispute concerning their legal rights, it will not ordinarily be granted until the right is established....'" Quoting from Mogen David Wine Corp. v. Borenstein, 267 Wis. 503, 509, 66 N.W.2d 157 (1954).

    Consolidated School Dist. v. Frey (1960), 11 Wis.2d 434, 439, 105 N.W.2d 841, states: ". . . The letting of a construction contract by the school district, however, was not governed by sec. 66.29 in any other sense. Sec. 66.29 does not apply to contracts by a public body for public work unless that body is charged by some other statute with the duty of advertising for, and receiving, proposals for such public work. Cullen v. Rock County (1943), 244 Wis. 237, 12 N.W.2d 38 . . . ." And in Menzl v. Milwaukee (1966), 32 Wis.2d 266, 271, 145 N.W.2d 198, we held:

  2. Joyce v. County of Dunn

    192 Wis. 2d 699 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995)   Cited 5 times

    All public work, of the kinds mentioned in section 66.29(1)(c) where the estimated cost of such work will exceed $1,000 shall be let by contract to the lowest responsible bidder, such contract shall be let, made and entered into pursuant to and in accordance with section 66.29. This paragraph shall not apply to highway contracts which the county highway committee is authorized by law to let or make. This second opinion observed that it was reasonable to suppose that ยง 59.07(4)(c) was enacted in response to a supreme court decision, Cullen v. Rock County, 244 Wis. 237, 12 N.W.2d 38 (1943). Cullen held that absent a statutory requirement, a county board has no duty to take bids for the building of county buildings, and that there was no such statute extant.

  3. OPINION NO. OAG 86-77

    66 Op. Att'y Gen. 284 (Ops.Wis.Atty.Gen. 1977)   Cited 1 times

    However, it is equally lear that absent any such legal restrictions or given a contract which falls outside such legal restrictions as have been enacted, a municipality is free to let its contracts without notice and competitive bidding constraints. This was made clear by the Wisconsin Supreme Court in Cullen v. Rock County, 244 Wis. 237, 12 N.W.2d 38 (1943). The court's subsequent holding in Menzl v. Milwaukee, 32 Wis.2d 266, 271, 145 N.W.2d 198 (1966), reaffirming the proposition, is representative of a long and consistent line of Wisconsin cases:

  4. City of Merrill v. Wenzel Brothers, Inc.

    88 Wis. 2d 676 (Wis. 1979)   Cited 22 times
    Recognizing that this rule has been applied in three opinions of the Supreme Court of the United States

    The court found the rule had been applied in three United States Supreme Court cases. United States v. Purcell Envelope Co., 249 U.S. 313 (1919); Harvey v. United States, 105 U.S. 671 (1881), and Garfielde v. United States, 93 U.S. 242 (1876). The Arnold holding was subsequently considered in Cullen v. Rock County, 244 Wis. 237, 12 N.W.2d 38 (1943), where this court said that a resolution accepting a bid would constitute a contract and create a duty to execute a formal contract only where there is a statutory duty to let the contract to the lowest bidder and there is a formal contract on file. The court did not find a binding contract in Cullen because there was no contract on file and the bid had been accepted subject to negotiation of a formal contract, the details of which were then undetermined.

  5. Menzl v. Milwaukee

    32 Wis. 2d 266 (Wis. 1966)   Cited 24 times   1 Legal Analyses

    If the contract in question is not subject to the provisions of the bid section, the city is not bound by that type of procedure and even, after determining to invite bids, may reject any or all bids and ask for new bids, or may contract on the basis of reasonable business judgment with one who is not the low bidder. Cullen v. Rock County (1943), 244 Wis. 237, 240, 12 N.W.2d 38, 10 McQuillin, Mun. Corp. (3d ed.), pp. 272-274, sec. 29.31. If, on the other hand, the towing contract can be let only pursuant to bid procedure, it is necessary to determine whether the commissioner has the discretion to award the contract to other than the low bidder bearing in mind that Menzl was the higher of the two bidders.

  6. Pembar, Inc., v. Knapp

    111 N.W.2d 476 (Wis. 1961)   Cited 4 times
    In Pembar, Inc., v. Knapp (1961), 14 Wis.2d 527, 534, 111 N.W.2d 476, we held that separate museum funds were not city funds since they were not under control of the common council.

    Unless appellants can show such authority, the museum board does not have to resort to competitive bidding. Cullen v. Rock County (1943), 244 Wis. 237, 240, 12 N.W.2d 38, held that, "`In the absence of charter or statutory requirement, municipal contracts need not be let under competitive bidding.'" Also see 10 McQuillin, Mun. Corp. (3d ed.), pp. 272-274, sec. 29.31.

  7. Consolidated School Dist. v. Frey

    105 N.W.2d 841 (Wis. 1960)   Cited 4 times

    The reference to sec. 66.29 in the advertisement and contract documents would permit examination of that statute if necessary to determine the intent of the parties. The letting of a construction contract by the school district, however, was not governed by sec. 66.29 in any other sense. Sec. 66.29 does not apply to contracts by a public body for public work unless that body is charged by some other statute with the duty of advertising for, and receiving, proposals for such public work. Cullen v. Rock County (1943), 244 Wis. 237, 12 N.W.2d 38. Although the principle of the Cullen decision is no longer applicable to contracts entered into by counties, that change resulted from ch. 456, Laws of 1945, creating sec. 59.07(4)(c), now appearing as sec. 59.08(1). See also ch. 280, Laws of 1949. No statute requires a school district to advertise for proposals for construction.

  8. OPINION NO. OAG

    2-08 (Ops.Wis.Atty.Gen. Feb. 14, 2008)

    Consequently, competitive bidding is not required. See Cullen v. Rock County, 244 Wis. 237, 240, 12 N.W.2d 38 (1943). Your third question is whether your county may print its own proceedings or post them on its web site even if it does not seek competitive bids for the publication of its own proceedings as provided in Wis. Stat. ยง 59.14(3).

  9. OPINION NO. OAG 55-77

    66 Op. Att'y Gen. 198 (Ops.Wis.Atty.Gen. 1977)   Cited 1 times

    If this piece of equipment constitutes "supplies or materials," it has to be let by competitive bids. If it does not, the contract need not be let by competitive bidding and the county may make the contract it deems most provident. Cullen v. Rock County, 244 Wis. 237, 240, 12 N.W.2d 38 (1943); Pembar, Inc. v. Knapp, 14 Wis.2d 527, 111 N.W.2d 476 (1961); Consolidated School Dist. v. Frey, 11 Wis.2d 434, 105 N.W.2d 841 (1960). If the contract is not subject to the bid section, the county could invite bids and reject any or all bids, or contract on the basis of reasonable business judgment with one who is not the low bidder.

  10. OPINION NO. OAG 36-75

    64 Op. Att'y Gen. 100 (Ops.Wis.Atty.Gen. 1975)

    Wisconsin law is in accord. As stated in Cullen v. Rock County (1943), 244 Wis. 237, 242, 12 N.W.2d 38: "In this respect the case is quite different from [ L. G. Arnold, Inc., v. Hudson (1934). 215 Wis. 5, 254 N.W. 108] which involved a city which was bound by law to let the contract to the lowest bidder.