Findley v. City of Pittsburgh
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas, No. 2, of Allegheny county: No. 234 of October and November Term 1875, in Equity.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas, No. 2, of Allegheny county: No. 234 of October and November Term 1875, in Equity. This was an appeal from the decree of the court dismissing a bill in equity, filed by George Findley, a tax-payer, against the authorities of the city of Pittsburgh, to restrain them from awarding a contract for certain “wrought-iron rising mains,” to be usedin connection with the city water-works, to J. M. Brush & Co., whose bid, it was alleged, was $5000 higher than that contained in another proposal for the same work. The facts and questions involved are substantially…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Gordon
Whilst we are not prepared to take the same view of the facts in this case as did the learned judge of the court below, in that we think the allegations of fraud, charged against N. Snyder & Co. in a former contract with the city, are not sustained, yet we must adopt his final conclusion as the proper one. We have ruled in the case of the Commonwealth ex rel. N. Snyder & Co. v. Mitchell et al. and the City of Pittsburgh, argued at the same time with this case, that the Act of Assembly imposed upon the city authorities duties, in awarding the contract in controversy, which were not merely…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Kaufman Construction Co. v. HolcombSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
- Hibbs v. ArensbergSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
- Tanenbaum v. D'AscenzoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
- Interstate Vitrified Brick & Paving Co. v. Philadelphia, Mack Paving Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894
- Kell v. RudySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.