Holscher v. Ingalls Stone Co.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 236, Oct. T., 1916, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Philadelphia Co., Sept. T., 1914, No. 7, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Peter Holscher and Joseph J. Holscher trading as Peter Holscher & Son, v. Ingalls Stone Company.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 236, Oct. T., 1916, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Philadelphia Co., Sept. T., 1914, No. 7, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Peter Holscher and Joseph J. Holscher trading as Peter Holscher & Son, v. Ingalls Stone Company. Assumpsit by a subcontractor against a contractor to recover the balance alleged to be due on a contract for hauling, setting, cleaning and painting limestone on a building erected at Nineteenth street and South Rittenhouse Square, Philadelphia. Before Shoemaker, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Verdict and judgment…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Kephart, J.,
The contract under which the appellees were working provided “should the subcontractor be obstructed or delayed in the prosecution or completion of his work by the act, neglect, delay or fault pf the contractor or the architect......then the time herein fixed for the completion of the work shall be extended......but no allowance shall be made unless a claim therefor is presented to the architect and the contractor within forty-eight hours after the occurrence of the delay. The allowance for extension of time and duration of such delays shall be certified by the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Werneberg v. PittsburgSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Wolf v. AugustineSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
- Cramp & Co. v. Boyertown Burial Casket Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1913
- Huggins v. NeillSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1896