Lilly v. Person & Riegel
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 79, July T., 1894, by defendants, from judgment of C. P. Northampton Co., April T., 1893, No. 43, on verdict for plaintiff. Assumpsit on a building contract.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 79, July T., 1894, by defendants, from judgment of C. P. Northampton Co., April T., 1893, No. 43, on verdict for plaintiff. Assumpsit on a building contract. Before Reeder, J. At the trial it appeared that plaintiff and defendants on May 19, 1891, entered into a contract in writing, the material portions of which were as follows: “ That the said party of the first part for and in consideration of the sum of money as hereinafter mentioned to be paid by the said party of the second part, as well as the covenants and agreements hereinafter recited by the said party of the second part…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Fell,
Our labor in reviewing the proceedings of a protracted trial involving many complicated questions of law and fact has been materially lessened by the clear and orderly manner in which the case has been presented by counsel.
The plaintiff contracted in writing with the defendants to construct a building for them for $17,550. One of the specifications provided that he should tear down an old' building and use such materials in the construction of the new one as were suitable, “ the net value of such materials to be reckoned at the amount stated in the contractor’s bid,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Jordan v. StewartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1854
3Cited by6 opinions
- Universal Builders, Inc. v. Moon Motor Lodge, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
- Caldwell & Drake v. SchmulbachDistrict Court, N.D. West Virginia · 1909
- Pittsburg Iron & Steel Engineering Co. v. National Tube Works Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
- New-Com Corp. v. Estate of GaffneyDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1987
- Texter v. WachsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1919
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.