Legal Opinion

Kull v. Middleman

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 18, 1912No. Appeal, No. 163PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal, No. 163, April T., 1912, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Somerset Co., Sept. T., 1909, No. 278, on verdict for plaintiff in case of A. G. Hull v. Solomon Middleman. Assumpsit for balance alleged to be due in installing a heating apparatus.

Read the full summary

Appeal, No. 163, April T., 1912, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Somerset Co., Sept. T., 1909, No. 278, on verdict for plaintiff in case of A. G. Hull v. Solomon Middleman. Assumpsit for balance alleged to be due in installing a heating apparatus. Before Koozer, P. J. At the trial defendant made the following offer: We now propose to prove by the witness on the stand the amount of damages he has sustained by reason of the failure of this heating plant to do the work as contracted for; we propose to prove in a general way how it affected his business as a merchant, the inconvenience and…

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion bt

Morrison, J.,

In this action of assumpsit the plaintiff declared upon an oral contract, for the price of $380, for furnishing all of the material and doing all of the work in installing in the building of the defendant, in the borough of Windber, a heating plant, consisting of boiler, radiators, pipes, etc., complete, and in addition to that he claimed the sum of $81.37 for furnishing the material and doing a job of plumbing for the defendant in another house in the same borough.

Plaintiff averred that he complied with his contract as to the heating apparatus and was entitled to…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Morgan v. GambleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
  2. Moore v. Carter, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County1892
  3. Crawford & Moyes v. McKinneySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
  4. Shultz v. SeibelSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
  5. Sticker v. OverpeckSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Beyer v. MountzSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
  2. Standard Roller Bearing Co. v. Hub Machine Welding & Contracting Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1915

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API