Nuebling to Use v. Topton Boro.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
The Borough of Topton entered into an oral contract employing appellant, civil engineers, engaged in designing borough water plants, to investigate the suitability of certain land as an additional source of water supply and to draw up plans and specifications therefor. There is no question that such investigation was made and plans and specifications were prepared in accordance with the contract of employment, which were accepted, approved and made use of by the borough. The claim for compensation was fair and reasonable. All the members of council, except one who did not vote,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Long v. Lemoyne BoroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
- Witten v. StoutSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- Mayer v. Chelten Avenue Building Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
- Wilkes-Barre Connecting Railroad v. Kingston BoroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
- Miller v. West View BoroughSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
3Cited by16 opinions
- Luzerne Township v. Fayette CountySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
- Westerman v. City of CarlsbadNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1951
- McGregor Estate v. Young TownshipSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
- Mateer v. Swissvale BoroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Irvine EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.