Underwood v. Gendell
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jan. T., 1909, by plaintiff, .from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., June T., 1909, No. 804, overruling demurrer, to return to writ of alternative mandamus in case of William I. Underwood v. J. Howard Gendell, City Solicitor of the City of Philadelphia. Petition for mandamus. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the case. Error assigned was in entering judgment for defendant on the demurrer.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Potter,
February 14,1910:
This is an appeal from the refusal of the court below to grant to the plaintiff a writ of peremptory mandamus, against J. Howard-Gendell, city solicitor of Philadelphia. The petition averred that one George W. Pierson, on February 27, 1901, entered into a contract with the city of Philadelphia to erect a schoolhouse, and on the same date executed a bond to the city, with the Lincoln Savings & Trust Company as surety, conditioned for compliance by the contractor with the provisions of the ordinance of councils of March 30, 1896. The ordinance…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Heffner v. Commonwealth ex rel. KlineSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1857
- Commonwealth v. KesslerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
- Pereles v. WatertownDistrict Court, W.D. Wisconsin · 1874
3Cited by8 opinions
- Homan v. MacKeySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- PURCELL v. ALTOONASupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
- Kulp v. Board of InspectorsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- Baldi v. White, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1945
- Goldstein v. Boss, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Beaver County1931
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.