Wade v. Pittsburg Machine Tool Co.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 161, April T., 1909, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. No. 2, Allegheny Co., July T., 1905, No. 1,004, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Francis Henry Wade v. Pittsburg Machine Tool Company. Assumpsit to recover money paid for repairs. Before Frazer, P. J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Superior Court. Plaintiff presented these points: 1. The verdict of the jury should be for the plaintiff. Answer: Refused.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 161, April T., 1909, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. No. 2, Allegheny Co., July T., 1905, No. 1,004, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Francis Henry Wade v. Pittsburg Machine Tool Company. Assumpsit to recover money paid for repairs. Before Frazer, P. J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Superior Court. Plaintiff presented these points: 1. The verdict of the jury should be for the plaintiff. Answer: Refused. To which answer counsel for plaintiff except. [1] 3. The tenant is bound to make the repairs ordered by the department of public works, and if he refuses to do so…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Orlady, J.,
The plaintiff leased to the defendant company a factory for a term of five years. The lease contained the following provision: “The tenant will make all necessary repairs at his own proper costs and charges, without abatement of said rent, and at the expiration of the term aforesaid shall and will yield up the said premises in as good and sufficient repair as when received (reasonable wear and tear and accident by fire and other causes excepted) without any further notice from the said parties of the first part.”
During the term of the lease the superintendent of the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Girard Trust Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1947
- Irish v. Rosenbaum Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1943