Legal Opinion

Massiah v. Hood

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 11, 1939No. Appeal, 221PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Stadtfeld, J.,

The defendants, appellants, were the general contractors, for the erection of a high school building in Collingdale, Pennsylvania. The plaintiff, appellee, was the sub-contractor to construct the cement and concrete work. He brought this action to recover a balance due on his contract and also for certain items he denominated “extras”.

The contract was embraced in an oral estimate submitted by appellee to appellants and a. letter from the latter to the former, dated February 5, 1936, as follows: “We hereby accept your estimate to furnish all the labor and materials…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Bowman v. Gum, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
  2. Mannella v. PittsburghSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  3. Trabue v. WalshSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
  4. Pierson v. LondonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
  5. Berlin Smokeless Coal & Clay Co. v. RohmSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Brown v. PostonWashington Supreme Court · 1954
  2. Thomas M. Durkin & Sons, Inc. v. Nether Providence Township School AuthoritySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  3. Thomas M. Durkin & Sons, Inc. v. Nether Providence Township School AuthoritySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1983

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

Powered by the Exa API