Legal Opinion

Miller v. West View Borough

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 20, 1914No. Appeal, No. 71PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal, No. 71, April T., 1914, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Allegheny Co., April T., 1911, No. 894, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Cyrus E. Miller, surviving partner of John G. Trimble and Cyrus E. Miller, trading as Trimble & Miller, v. West View Borough. Assumpsit for engineering work.

Read the full summary

Appeal, No. 71, April T., 1914, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Allegheny Co., April T., 1911, No. 894, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Cyrus E. Miller, surviving partner of John G. Trimble and Cyrus E. Miller, trading as Trimble & Miller, v. West View Borough. Assumpsit for engineering work. Before MacFarlane, J. From the pleadings it appeared that plaintiffs claimed to recover the sum of $2,976.87, with interest, as compensation for the preparation of plans and specifications for a thoroughfare in the borough of West View, and also the sum of $325, with interest, for services…

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Henderson, J.,

The contract of the plaintiffs with the defendant as shown by the plaintiffs’ proposal of March 7, 1910, and the acceptance thereof by the borough on March 15, 1910, embraced three subjects: (1) compensation at the rate of $200 per year for “routine engineering work of streets and sewers;” (2) disposal plant construction for which compensation was to be allowed at the rate of two and one-quarter per cent of the cost; (3) for other construction work two and one-quarter per cent for plans and specifications and two and one-quarter per cent for engineering and…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Long v. Lemoyne BoroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
  2. Carpenter v. Yeadon BoroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
  3. Schenck v. BurgessSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
  4. Aspinwall-Delafield Co. v. Borough of AspinwallSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
  5. Jones v. Schuylkill Light, Heat and Power Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Nuebling to Use v. Topton Boro.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  2. American Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Mifflintown Borough, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Juniata County1930
  3. Dunmore v. McAndrewSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1915

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

Powered by the Exa API