Howard v. Smedley

Citations

• 140 Pa. 81
• 21 A. 253
• 1891 Pa. LEXIS 805

Syllabus

<p>(a) Plaintiff entered into a contract to erect for the defendant an elevator for the hotel of the latter, agreeing that if it did not answer, according to the proposals made, he would take it out at Ms own expense, and that payment should be made when it was “ in running order satisfactory to ” the defendant:</p> <p>1. The plaintiff’s testimony, in an action to recover the price, showing that the elevator when in operation was not in running order satisfactory to the defendant, and that the latter’s objections did not arise out of mere caprice, it was not error to enter a peremptory nonsuit: Singerly v. Thayer, 108 Pa. 291.</p>