Green v. Paul
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 3, Jan. T., 1893, by defendants, Andrew N. Paul et al., owners, and the Schuylkill IBver East Side R. R., contractor, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., Sept. T., 1886, No. 97, M. L. D., on verdict for plaintiff, Andrew M. Green. Scire facias sur mechanic’s lien.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 3, Jan. T., 1893, by defendants, Andrew N. Paul et al., owners, and the Schuylkill IBver East Side R. R., contractor, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., Sept. T., 1886, No. 97, M. L. D., on verdict for plaintiff, Andrew M. Green. Scire facias sur mechanic’s lien. At the trial, before Brbgy, J., it appeared that plaintiff made a contract in writing to build a stable for defendants for the sum of $5,670. He filed a claim for $5,758.46, averring that the contract had been superseded by oral agreements as to the work. The court charged in part as follows: “ [It is an admitted…
1Opinion of the Court
Peb Cubjam,
It appears that Mr. Green, the plaintiff, made a written contract to construct the stable in question for the sum of 15,670, and that he has charged more than that sum for doing so. An examination of the case, however, shows, and we think very clearly, that this written contract was not regarded by either party when the work came to be done. Indeed, it is so very vague and indefinite that it would be difficult to carry it out literally. Nearly all of the details of the work were left unprovided for, and had to be supplied orally from time to time, in order to carry it out…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Bailey v. MartinCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1960
- Fleck v. CollinsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
- Reber v. BrownbackSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1905