Case ID: pa-super_187/html/0027-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Ervin, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

McGill, Appellant, v. Wright.
    Argued March 25, 1958.
    Before Rhodes, P. J., Gunther, Wright, Woodside, Ervin, and Watkins, JJ. (Hirt, J., absent).
    Before Beloff, J., without a jury.
    
      Henry N. Finemcm, with him Morris Passon, for appellant.
    
      Leon S. Rosenthal, for appellees.
    June 11, 1958:
   Opinion by

Ervin, J.,

This is an appeal from an order of the court below refusing plaintiff’s motion for a new trial. Plaintiff sued in assumpsit to collect a balance of $400.00 which he alleged to be due under a written contract providing for the removal of an old shed and the erection of

a new one. The total contract price was $1,240.00 and the plaintiff admitted receipt of the first two instalments totalling $840.00. The evidence clearly reveals that there was a substantial performance of the contract by the plaintiff. The defendants testified that plaintiff built a room 11 feet by 10 feet 8 inches whereas the written agreement called for a room 12 feet by 12 feet; that the agreement specified the removal of an old arch in the first floor living room and the installation of a new one, whereas plaintiff “only moved the old arch over”; that the plastering was rough instead of smooth and that the work was not done promptly.

The court below found for the defendants and later dismissed plaintiff’s motion for a new trial. A new trial must be granted because the defendants presented no evidence at all to show the cost of correcting the above mentioned defects.

Order reversed and a new trial is granted.