Shoemaker v. Riebe

Citations

• 241 Pa. 402
• 88 A. 662
• 1913 Pa. LEXIS 797

Syllabus

<p>Contracts — Building contracts — Breach—Architects—Authority to assess damages — Bet-off—Case for jury.</p> <p>1. The authority of an architect, under a subcontract for the construction of certain stone work which provides that monthly payments shall be made to the subcontractor “as per architect’s estimate,” and that the work shall be completed in a manner satisfactory to the architect, does not extend to a final determination of the amount of compensation due the subcontractor where he had been discharged by the architect before the completion of the work, and the legality of this action was denied and depended on disputed facts.</p> <p>2. In an action of assumpsit by a subcontractor against a general contractor to recover a balance due on a contract for the construction of a wall, where defendant averred that the wall had been improperly located, so that the whole work had to be tom down and rebuilt, the cost of which tearing down and rebuilding defendant sought to set off against plaintiff’s claim, and where plaintiff’s evidence tended to show that the wall had been located in accordance with defendant’s directions, and that difficulty had also been occasioned by reason of the poor construction of certain brick piers in the rear of the wall, with which plaintiff had nothing to do, the ease was for the jury to determine which party was responsible for the rebuilding of the wall, and a verdict for plaintiff was properly sustained where there was evidence that though plaintiff had not completed the work, he had been discharged at the instance of the architect before the work was finished, without reasonable cause.</p>