Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

THE PROGRESSIVE CLAY COMPANY, complainant, v. THE TOWNSHIP OF SPRINGFIELDin the county of Union, defendant-respondent.E.J. FLAHERTY CONTRACTING COMPANY, INCORPORATED, defendant-appellant,

The provisions of the contract between the contractor and the township in this case on the matter of extra work, replacements, alterations, and damages, being entirely clear and reasonable, defining as they do the rights and liabilities of the parties to the contract with the especial purpose of safeguarding the township against too high an expenditure and against possible controversies, the contractor may not introduce parol testimony to vary them.

PER CURIAM.

The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Vice-Chancellor Fielder in the court of chancery.

For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, TRENCHARD, PARKER, CASE, BODINE, DONGES, HEHER, PERSKIE, VAN BUSKIRK, KAYS, HETFIELD, DEAR, WELLS, DILL, JJ. 14.

For reversal — None.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PROGRESSIVE CLAY CO. v. SPRINGFIELD TWP
(Sep 27, 1933)