Morse v. Maurer
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 60, Oct. T., 1907, by defendant, from order of C. P. No. 2, Phila. Co., Dec. T., 1906, No. 2,939, making absolute rule for judgment for want o’f a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Morse, Williams & Co. v. D. Maurer & Son Co. Assumpsit for price of a freight elevator.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 60, Oct. T., 1907, by defendant, from order of C. P. No. 2, Phila. Co., Dec. T., 1906, No. 2,939, making absolute rule for judgment for want o’f a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Morse, Williams & Co. v. D. Maurer & Son Co. Assumpsit for price of a freight elevator. The defendant filed an affidavit of defense, the material portions of which were as follows: That during the summer and early fall of the year 1906, the defendant was erecting and constructing for its own occupancy an entirely new factory building, three stories high, at No. 331 North Eighth street, in the…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Orlady, J.,
The plaintiffs, who were engaged in the construction and erection of elevators for buildings, submitted a written proposal to the defendant, dated September 14, 1906, containing specifications for an elevator to be installed in the defendant’s property, according to the description therein given, for the price of $425, payable on completion. The court below made absolute a rule for judgment, for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense, and the defendant’s contention is, that because the work as finished by the plaintiffs did not meet the approval of the public…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Johnson v. HulingsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1883
- Holt v. GreenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1873
3Cited by4 opinions
- Halderman v. Pennhurst State School & HospitalCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1990
- Halderman v. Pennhurst State School & HospitalCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1990
- West v. JarviWashington Supreme Court · 1954
- Meneice v. Camp Kadimah Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1945