Medoff v. Effenberg

Citations

• 59 Pa. Super. 106
• 1915 Pa. Super. LEXIS 28

Syllabus

<p>Appeals — Assignments of error — Evidence—Charge.</p> <p>1. An assignment of error violates Rule XVI, which charges that the trial judge erred “in admitting evidence in the nature of a quantum meruit,” etc., without quoting the evidence.</p> <p>2. An assignment of error violates Rule XV, which merely paraphrases a part of the charge without setting forth the portion of the charge complained of ipsissimis verbis.</p> <p>Contract — Architect’s services — Quantum meruit — Entire contract.</p> <p>3. In an action by an architect to recover for services where the statement of claim is for a percentage on the entire cost of the construction of the building, but at the trial the plaintiff proves a wrongful discharge, and claims merely for services actually performed, and the defendant makes no objection, the latter cannot after a trial on the merits, and a verdict for plaintiff based on a quantum meruit, object, on appeal, that the contract was an entire contract, and that plaintiff was not entitled to recover on a quantum meruit.</p>