Skip to main content
· 11/10/1897

Cope v. Hastings

Citations

  • 183 Pa. 300
  • 38 A. 717
  • 1897 Pa. LEXIS 759

Syllabus

<p>Contracts — Contract for erection of state capítol — Architects—Delegation of authority — Action against the state — Act of April 14, 1897.</p> <p>Under the Act of April 14, 1897, P. L. 19, commissioners were appointed to erect a new state capítol oil land owned by the state, at a cost not to exceed a sum specified. Apart from the location, cost and fireproof character of the building, everything was left to the discretion of the commissioners. The commissioners employed au expert architect under authority given them by the act, and with his assistance issued specifications, styled the programme. Under the programme three disinterested architects were selected as a board of experts to whom all plans were submitted anonymously with the assurance to those competing that all the plans submitted would have full consideration; that the board would recommend eight designs, out of which the commissioners agreed to select one, whose author should be appointed architect “to design and supervise' the erection ” of the building, and two others whose authors should receive first and second medals respectively. Out of thirty designs submitted the board of experts selected eight which they recommended to the commissioners, and also reported that all the designs submitted would exceed the appropriation unless the materials used and the character of the workmanship were to be unworthy of the capital of the commonwealth. They also reported that two of the designs submitted had been excluded from the competition for violation of the directions of the programme, one because trees were shown in one of the drawings, and the other because all the elevations in the drawing were not rendered in monotone. The commissioners disapproved the action of the board of experts, set aside the competition under the programme, ordered all designs to be returned, and invited submission to the commissioners of new plans by all the competing architects. Two architects who had submitted plans filed a b

Judges: Dean, Fell, Green, McCollum, Mitchell, Sterrett, Williams

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.