Leskie v. Haseltine
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 111, July T., 1892, by plaintiff, Henry B. Leskie, from judgment of C. P. No. 4, Phila. Co., March T., 1888, No. 559, on verdict for defendant, Charles F. Haseltine. Assumpsit on alleged agreement to award building contract.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 111, July T., 1892, by plaintiff, Henry B. Leskie, from judgment of C. P. No. 4, Phila. Co., March T., 1888, No. 559, on verdict for defendant, Charles F. Haseltine. Assumpsit on alleged agreement to award building contract. At the trial it appeared that by a letter dated March 28, 1887, defendant requested plaintiff to bid for the contract of erecting the Haseltine building, on the south side of Chestnut street, west of Fifteenth street in the city of Philadelphia. Plaintiff complied with the request and presented a bid, which was found to be the lowest bid. Plaintiff testified…
1Opinion of the Court
Pee Cueiam,
The def'iSudanhwas admittedly the lowest bidder for the erection of defendant’s building. It does not follow, however, that because he was the lowest bidder the defendant was bound to award him the contract. The fact that, upon the opening of the bids, either the architect or the defendant may have said to the plaintiff, “ You are the lucky man,” amounts to nothing more than a recognition of the fact that he was the lowest bidder. After the bids had been opened, it was the right of the defendant to inquire into the fitness and ability of the respective bidders to fulfil the…
2Cited by8 opinions
- R. Glen FENSTERMACHER, Appellant, v. PHILADELPHIA NATIONAL BANK and Carson Investment CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1974
- Smith v. KaufmanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
- Sipowicz v. OlivieriSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
- Fenstermacher v. Philadelphia National Bank & Carson Investment Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1972
- Cedar Rapids Lumber Co. v. FisherSupreme Court of Iowa · 1906
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.