J. C. McNeil Co. v. Nimick

Citations

• 194 Pa. 187
• 45 A. 63
• 1899 Pa. LEXIS 757

Syllabus

<p>Contract — Written contract — Construction.</p> <p>Plaintiff sold and delivered a boiler to defendant, and guaranteed it to develop its rated horse power with a certain coal consumption. The-guarantee then continued: “When using the waste heat from your heating furnace the boiler will develop not less than its rated horse power when the furnace is in good working condition.” The evidence showed that the fire box of the boiler was immediately under it, but that the furnace from which the waste heat was to be obtained was about twenty-five feet from the boiler, and was connected with it by a neck which had in it a right angle. When the fires in the furnace were out, cold air would rush from the furnace through the neck to the boiler. This could have been obviated by the use of adjustable dampers in the neck. There was nothing in the contract which gave the plaintiff any control over the furnace and its connections, and certain erasures in the'printed form of contract indicated an intention to exclude plaintiff from any meddling with the furnace. The defendants refused to pay for the boiler on the ground that it had failed to develop the horse power mentioned in the contract. Held, that the defendants were responsible for their heating furnaces, connections and dampers.</p> <p>Trial — Charge of court — Point.</p> <p>A point Which involves a request to decide a question of fact by drawing a double inference is properly refused. Such a question should be left to the jury.</p>