Stitzer v. Horsham TP
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania
At Law. Action by James Herbert Stitzer against the Township of Horsham. On plaintiff’s motion for a new trial and defendant’s motion for judgment non obstante veredicto.
1Opinion of the Court
BUFFINGTON, Circuit Judge.
This case involved a contract for the building of a new macadamized road for a township. The verdict —clearly a compromise one — was in favor of the plaintiff for $9,500, and in view of the expense and delay incident to a retrial, to say nothing of the natural unwillingness of the township to make repairs, which may be needed on the road pending the settlement of the case, we are strongly inclined to allow the present verdict to stand as rendered.
Indeed, the case is one where it is desirable on all sides.that there should be an end of strife. When the jury went out…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Union Township v. Gibboney & NelsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1880
- American Road Machine Co. v. Township of WashingtonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
- City of Elizabeth v. FitzgeraldCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1902
- Crawford & Moyes v. McKinneySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
- Rice v. Lake TownshipSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909