Howard v. Smedley
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
APPEAL BY PLAINTIFF FROM THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS NO. 3 OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY. No. 207 July Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 767 December Term 1888, C. P. No. 3. On January 28, 1889, George C. Howard brought assumpsit against Enos Smedley. Issue.
Read the full summary
APPEAL BY PLAINTIFF FROM THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS NO. 3 OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY. No. 207 July Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 767 December Term 1888, C. P. No. 3. On January 28, 1889, George C. Howard brought assumpsit against Enos Smedley. Issue. At the trial on October 16, 1889, the testimony on the part of the plaintiff was to the effect that on August 9, 1888, he entered into a written contract to erect for the defendant, the owner of the Windsor Hotel, leased to one Moore, a certain kind of elevator for said hotel to be operated by water pressure from a steam cylinder, in…
1Per curiam
We think this case is ruled by Singerly v. Thayer, 108 Pa. 291. The contract for the elevator contained this clause: “ I further agree that if my horizontal cylinder direct hydraulic elevator does not answer as per above agreement, then I will take it out at my own expense.” The plaintiff further agreed that payment should be made “ when the elevator is in running order satisfactory to Mr. Moore or Mr. Smedley.” The evidence showed that it was not in satisfactory running order to Mr. Smedley, although various efforts were made by plaintiff at various times, covering several months, to put it…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Singerly v. ThayerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1885
3Cited by8 opinions
- Thaler Bros. v. Greisser Construction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
- Haney-Campbell Co. v. Preston Creamery Ass'nSupreme Court of Iowa · 1903
- Garland v. KeelerNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1906
- Delahunty Dyeing Machine Co. v. Pennsylvania Knitting MillsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
- Smith v. WeaverSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.