Kull v. Middleman

Citations

• 51 Pa. Super. 137
• 1912 Pa. Super. LEXIS 192

Syllabus

<p>Contract — Substantial compliance — Evidence—Case for fury.</p> <p>In an action to recover a balance alleged to be due on a contract for furnishing a heating apparatus, the case is for the jury where the evidence for the plaintiff, although contradicted, tends to show that plaintiff had acted honestly with intent to fulfill his contract, and had performed it substantially, except in some minor particulars. In such ,a case the plaintiff is entitled to recover the contract price less an allowance to the defendant for whatever loss or damage he may have suffered from the plaintiff's omissions.</p>