Mazet v. City of Pittsburgh
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
APPEAL BY DEFENDANTS FROM THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS NO. 2 OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY. No. 112 October Term 1889, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 87 January Term 1889, C. P. No. 2, in Equity.
Read the full summary
APPEAL BY DEFENDANTS FROM THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS NO. 2 OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY. No. 112 October Term 1889, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 87 January Term 1889, C. P. No. 2, in Equity. In October, 1888, William Mazet filed a bill in equity against tbe city of Pittsburgh; William McCallin and others, composing the Department of Awards of said city; E. M. Bigelow, chief of the Department of Public Works of said city; and J. J. Booth and William Flinn, partners as Booth & Flinn; praying that a certain contract between said city and Booth & Flinn, for the paving and curbing of Craig street, be declared…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion,
Mr. Justice Sterrett:
One of the specifications is aimed generally at the decree; the other alleges error in not dismissing the bill. They are both as general as it is possible to make them, but it clearty appears from the record and argument of counsel that appellants rest their contention on two propositions: first, that the contract in question was regularly awarded in accordance with the charter and ordinances of the city, and is therefore neither void nor voidable; second, that, for reasons stated in the answers, the plaintiff has no standing in court.
After a careful consideration…
2Cited by60 opinions
- Chippewa Bridge Co. v. City of DurandWisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
- Ezy Parks v. LarsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
- Conduit & Foundation Corp. v. City of PhiladelphiaCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
- Inge v. Board of Public Works of MobileSupreme Court of Alabama · 1902
- Page v. KingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.