Opinion ID: 1810721
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: little holmes

Text: Stanton's complaint here is that, when its begin-work order came, there were located in the area of the work one power pole and a guy wire supporting another pole, and that these should have been removed before it was ordered to advance. The record establishes that an understanding had been arrived at between the owner of the power line and the Commission for the owner's removal of these. In the Commission's start-work directive, note was taken of the presence of these, and the Commission requested that Stanton begin at the north end of the project and work south with the expectation that these obstacles would be removed before they became a hindrance. In spite of maintaining (1) that it was the feasible thing to carry the whole project on at one time, and (2) that it was delayed until the pole and guy wire were removed, the record establishes that Stanton never began work until September 2, 1969, although the obstacles had been removed on July 29, 1969, and actually started its work at the north end of the project. Taking the testimony and inferences therefrom most strongly in favor of Stanton, it did not make a prima facie case as to Little Holmes.