Vulcanite Paving Co. v. Philadelphia

Citations

• 239 Pa. 524
• 86 A. 1086
• 1913 Pa. LEXIS 603

Syllabus

<p>Contracts — Construction—Consideration of the whole instrument — Municipal contract — Paving—Assessment bills.</p> <p>1. It is a settled rule of interpretation, to which there is no exception, that if possible a contract must be so interpreted as to give effect to all of its provisions. The construction of an agreement, which gives effect to the manifest intention of the parties and is not clearly at variance with the language of the whole instrument, should be adopted.</p> <p>2. The purpose in construing all contracts is to ascertain the intention of the parties, and when that is done by a general survey of the whole writing such intention cannot be defeated by the language in any one part of the instrument which standing alone, would lead to a contrary or different conclusion.</p> <p>3. Where a municipal contract for paving provides in express terms that the city “shall pay for paving the intersection of cross streets and in front of unassessable property in warrants,” and that for all other work the contractor should receive assessment bills on abutting property, which bills should be accepted as cash without recourse to the city if the bills should prove to be invalid, the acceptance by the contractor, under a misapprehension both by himself and the city, of assessment bills against non-assessable railroad property, will not preclude the contractor from collecting from the city in cash the amount represented by such assessment bills.</p>