Bailey v. Presbyterian Board
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 235, Jan. T., 1900, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Phila. County, June Term, 1897, No. 70, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Bailey, Milliken & Bland, Limited, v. Trustees of the Presbyterian Board of Publication and Sabbath School Work. Assumpsit to recover balance alleged to be due on a building contract.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 235, Jan. T., 1900, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Phila. County, June Term, 1897, No. 70, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Bailey, Milliken & Bland, Limited, v. Trustees of the Presbyterian Board of Publication and Sabbath School Work. Assumpsit to recover balance alleged to be due on a building contract. Before Biddle, P. J. At the trial it appeared that plaintiff claimed to recover $18,052.68, claimed to be due under a contract for structural steel and iron used in the Witherspoon Building, Philadelphia. The defense was substantially that the contract had not…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Me. Justice Mitchell,
Plaintiffs sued for a balance on a building contract, and tbe defense was a defalcation of damages for delay. The contract provided that plaintiffs should enter upon the work at once when directed by the architect, and “ finish and complete the same and every part and detail thereof in a durable and substantial manner, within ninety days from the date of starting the erection which is to be started within ninety days from the date of this contract and approved detail plans.”
It is practically undisputed that the work was not done within the contract time, and the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Whelan v. MillerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
- Jones v. Scranton Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922