White v. Braddock Borough School District
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 233, Oct. T., 1893, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Allegheny Co., Not'. T., 1892, No. 568, on verdict for plaintiff, D. M. White. Assumpsit on building contract.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 233, Oct. T., 1893, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Allegheny Co., Not'. T., 1892, No. 568, on verdict for plaintiff, D. M. White. Assumpsit on building contract. Before Porter, J. At the trial it appeared that, on Juty 13; 1891, plaintiff entered into a written contract with the school district defendant, by the terms of which plaintiff contracted to build for defendant a brick and stone school building for the price of $26,425, the building to be completed “ on or before the 1st day of March, 1892.” Under the terms of the contract, plaintiff was liable to pay to…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
An examination of the record in this case, with reference to the questions presented for our consideration, has failed to convince us that either of the specifications of error should be sustained. Plaintiff’s right to recover depended on questions of fact which appear to have been properly submitted to the jury and found in his favor. The main questions were, whether he substantially performed his contract with defendant within the time and in the manner required by the terms thereof. Was there a failure by him to perform in either of these respects; and, if so, was it due to his…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Wyandotte & D. R. Ry. v. King Bridge Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1900
- Pittsburg Iron & Steel Engineering Co. v. National Tube Works Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
- Shultz v. SeibelSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Bellefonte Borough Authority v. Gateway Equipment & Supply Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
- Dalila Avila v. Attorney General United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2023
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.