McManus v. Philadelphia
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 187, Jan. T., 1901, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., Sept. T., 1898, No. 18, sustaining exceptions to report of referee in case of Michael McManus v. City of Philadelphia. Exceptions to report of George W. Harkins, Esq., referee. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court. Errors assigned were in sustaining exceptions to report of referee.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mb. Justice Dean,
McManus, the appellant, on April 17, 1894, made a written contract with the city to build a police and fire patrol station on Fairmount avenue for the round price of $27,980. It was to be built according to plans and specifications which were appended to and made part of the contract. Then appears this clause in the contract:
“ It is further understood and agreed that this contract is entered into under and subject to the provisions of the act of assembly .... entitled ‘ An act to provide for the better government of cities of the first class in this commonwealth…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Filbert v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
- Malone v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
- Hepburn v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
3Cited by14 opinions
- Chilli v. McKeesport School DistrictSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Philadelphia Co. v. City of PittsburghSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
- Smart v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- First Savings & Trust Co. v. Milwaukee CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1914
- Schneider v. City of Ann ArborMichigan Supreme Court · 1917
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.