Anders v. Philadelphia

Citations

• 235 Pa. 125
• 83 A. 939
• 1912 Pa. LEXIS 512

Syllabus

<p>Municipalities — Municipal contract — Conspiracy—Competitive bidding — A ccounting — E quity.</p> <p>1. On a bill in equity by tax payers against a city, certain of its officers, and a municipal contractor, to declare a contract void because it was the product of an unlawful combination entered into with the view to prevent competitive bidding, and for an accounting from the contractor, the prayers of the bill cannot be granted where the court finds as a fact based on sufficient evidence, that there was no improper understanding among the bidders, and that the close approximation in the bids showed that there was competitive bidding in fact; and such prayers will be refused although the court finds as a fact that the contractor failed to comply strictly, or fully with the requirements of the contract, that this failure was known to the officers of the city, and that it was not expected or contemplated by such officers when the contract was awarded that there would be a strict and literal compliance by the successful bidder, whoever he might be, with all the requirements of the contract. The fact that there was such an understanding on the part of the city officers is not evidence of an unlawful combination to defeat competitive bidding.</p> <p>2. The complainants in such a bill have no standing to demand an accounting of the contractor of moneys which he received for work which he had not done. Such an accounting can be required from him only by the city itself.</p>