Legal Opinion

Raab Et Ux. v. Beatty

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 24, 1929No. Appeal 180PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Baldkige, J.,

Beatty, a builder, agreed to convey to the plaintiff a lot of ground on which a foundation had been partly laid, and to erect a house “identical in construction, etc., to the one erected on the adjacent lot.” The house in due time was completed, and in appearance and size appeared to be like the one on the next lot, but the plaintiff contended that the house was not built in a workman-like manner in that an old stump was left in the ground and the foundation built over it. As a result, the house settled, the walls cracked, and the plaintiff maintained that his property…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Filbert v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
  2. Dobkin v. LandsbergSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
  3. Seitzinger ex rel. Drinkel v. WeaverSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1829
  4. Dick Et Ux., to Use v. McWilliamsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
  5. Stewart v. TrimbleSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1901

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. ELDERKIN Et Ux. v. GasterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  2. Tyus v. RestaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  3. Gadbois v. Leb-Co. Builders, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  4. Rappaport v. SavitzSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
  5. Conway v. Cutler Group, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2012

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

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

Powered by the Exa API