Legal Opinion
D.A. Hill Co. v. Clevetrust Realty Investors
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided April 25, 1990No. 6 and 7 W.D. Appeal Dockets 1989PublishedCited by 59 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
FLAHERTY, Justice.
The issue raised by these cases is whether subcontractors who have furnished services on a construction project, but who have not been paid for all of their work, can recover on an unjust enrichment theory against a lending institution which foreclosed on the project after the owner defaulted on the construction loan.
On March 22, 1974 CleveTrust Realty Investors entered into a construction loan agreement with Edinboro Development Company, the owner, in the amount of $2,200,000 for the construction of a shopping mall in Erie County, Pennsylvania, to be…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Meehan v. Cheltenham TownshipSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
- Gee v. EberleSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
- Myers-Macomber Engineers v. M. L. W. Construction Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
3Cited by59 opinions
- EBC, Inc. v. Clark Building System, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2010
- Styer v. HugoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
- Northeast Fence & Iron Works, Inc. v. Murphy Quigley Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
- Baker v. FAMILY CREDIT COUNSELING COPR.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2006
- Ruthrauff, Inc. v. Ravin, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.