Ritter v. Harrisburg School District
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Me. Justice Schaepee,
A recital of the facts in this case disclosed by the record, will demonstrate that, as determined in the court below, plaintiff should not recover. In having his case submitted to a jury he got more consideration than he was entitled to receive; the trial judge should have decided the case as a matter of law.
Plaintiff, an architect, sued the School District of Harrisburg for $26,300, representing commissions on a school building which was never built and for which he did not even prepare definite and finished plans. The total commissions claimed amount to…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Addyston Pipe & Steel Co. v. City of CorrySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
- Williar v. NagleCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1908
- Harlow v. Borough of Beaver FallsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
- Osterling v. Allegheny CountySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Willis v. York County Directors of PoorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Charleroi Lumber Co. v. Bentleyville Borough School DistrictSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Altman v. Uniontown School DistrictSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Levy v. Leaseway System, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
- Clas v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1928