Legal Opinion

Meehan v. Cheltenham Township

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 28, 1963No. Appeal, 16PublishedCited by 127 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Me. Justice Cohen,

In compliance with The First Class Township Code,1 Morris Novak, Inc. (Novak), a developer, submitted a subdivision plan for the approval of the Board of Commissioners of Cheltenham Township. After the plan was approved, Novak subcontracted the work of paving streets and installing sewers to appellant. This work began in September, 1959 but ceased two months later because Novak had become insolvent in the interim without making any payments to appellant. The sewers and streets were subsequently dedicated to appelleetownship and the work completed by another…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Luzerne Township v. Fayette CountySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  2. Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance v. KleinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
  3. Bailis v. Reconstruction Finance Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1942
  4. Gordon, SEC. of Bk. v. BiesingerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  5. Jones v. AmselSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957

3Cited by127 opinions

  1. Steamfitters Local Union No. 420 Welfare Fund v. Philip Morris, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1999
  2. Braun v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  3. Styer v. HugoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  4. Weiner v. Bank of King of PrussiaDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1973
  5. Torchia on Behalf of Torchia v. TorchiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985

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

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

Powered by the Exa API