Legal Opinion

Baker v. Chambers

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 11, 1957No. Appeal, No. 152PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Hirt, J.,

The business of the plaintiff corporation is the furnishing of engineering services as consultants and *636otherwise. Michael Baker, Jr., its president and majority stockholder is a registered engineer. The corporation has an architectural department which it maintains as an adjunct to its engineering business and has in its employ one Joseph F. Bontempo, duly qualified and registered for the practice of architecture in Pennsylvania, in accordance with the Act of July 12, 1919, P. L. 933, as amended, 63 PS §21 et seq. Bontempo is the “head architect” in charge of his…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. F. F. Bollinger Co. v. Widmann Brewing Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
  2. Simons, Brittain & English, Inc. v. Armstrong & MarkellSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1925

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Town Planning & Engineering Associates, Inc. v. Amesbury Specialty Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1976
  2. Rosen v. Bureau of Professional and Occupational AffairsCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  3. Architectural Services, Pennsylvania Department of Justice1958
  4. Rudy v. Friedman, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Delaware County1971

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API