Connection lost
Server error
Constructors Supply Co. v. Bostrom Sheet Metal Works, Inc. Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A prime contractor relied on a subcontractor’s low bid to win a construction project. When the subcontractor tried to withdraw its bid post-award, the court used promissory estoppel to hold the subcontractor liable for the price difference, enforcing the original bid.
Legal Significance: This case adopts the modern rule that a subcontractor’s bid becomes an irrevocable offer under promissory estoppel once a general contractor reasonably and detrimentally relies upon it in submitting a prime bid.
Constructors Supply Co. v. Bostrom Sheet Metal Works, Inc. Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Defendant-appellant, Bostrom Sheet Metal Works, Inc. (Bostrom), a subcontractor, submitted a telephone bid of $372,000 for ventilation work to plaintiff-respondent, Constructors Supply Co. (Constructors), a prime contractor. The bid was submitted on the morning the prime bids for a university construction project were due. Constructors’ vice president called Bostrom back to confirm the price, and Bostrom’s representative affirmed it. Relying on Bostrom’s figure as the lowest bid for that work, Constructors incorporated it into its prime bid. Constructors was subsequently awarded the prime contract. Several days later, Bostrom notified Constructors that it was withdrawing its bid due to a substantial error and submitted a new, higher bid. Constructors formally accepted the original bid, but Bostrom refused to perform. Constructors hired other firms to complete the ventilation work at a higher cost and sued Bostrom to recover the difference. The trial court found for Constructors, noting that reliance on telephoned bids was a customary practice in the industry.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does the doctrine of promissory estoppel render a subcontractor’s bid irrevocable when a prime contractor has relied on that bid to its detriment in submitting its own successful prime bid?
Yes. The court affirmed the judgment for the plaintiff, holding that a Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat n
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does the doctrine of promissory estoppel render a subcontractor’s bid irrevocable when a prime contractor has relied on that bid to its detriment in submitting its own successful prime bid?
Conclusion
This decision aligns Minnesota law with the modern trend of using promissory Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea co
Legal Rule
A promise which the promisor should reasonably expect to induce action or Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Dui
Legal Analysis
The court explicitly chose between two conflicting lines of authority regarding the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deser
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- A subcontractor’s bid is a promise that becomes binding under promissory