Appeal, No. 61, Oct. T., 1959, from order of Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County, June T., 1957, No. 1089, in case of M. Shapiro and Son, Inc. v. Samuel C. Warwick et al. Judgment affirmed.
George W. Thompson, with him Baile, Thompson & Shea, for appellant.
Norman Snyder, with him Norman M. Brown, and Snyder and Snyder, for appellees.
Before Rhodes, P.j., Hirt, Wright, Woodside, Ervin, and Watkins, JJ. (gunther, J., absent).
[ 189 Pa. Super. Page 446]
This appeal is from the judgment of the court below in favor of Samuel C. Warwick and Ben Fineman, defendant appellees and against M. Shapiro and Son, Inc., plaintiff appellant.
The action was instituted upon a contract of indemnity for the alleged breach of certain warranties.
[ 189 Pa. Super. Page 447]
The warrants or promise of indemnity arose out of the following circumstances: Prior to July 21, 1950, Park Manor, Inc., was developing a tract of land in the neighborhood of Grey Street in the City of Chester. Adjoining this development was property owned by Edith Van Dyke Eyre, and adjoining the Eyre property was property of Joseph and Mamie Cisca, his wife. On July 21, 1950, Park Manor entered into an easement agreement with Eyre; and on July 26, 1950 entered into an easement agreement with the Ciscas. These agreements were for the purpose of erecting drainage conduits over the property of Park Manor and the Eyre property, among other things.
The warranties and promise of indemnity, that are the basis of this suit, were contained in the agreement of sale by the appellees of Park Manor to the appellant on July 30, 1951. It amounted to a covenant that the Eyre and Cisca agreements would be carried out. At the time of this agreement of sale preliminary work had been done but the sewer installation had not been completed. In December, 1951, a certain sewer line was constructed on the Eyre land parallel to and six (6) feet from the boundary line of the Cisca land. Thereafter, in January, 1952, a third party engaged in backfilling the Eyre land caused the sewer line to be moved several inches unto the Cisca property, causing seepage, and water was discharged across the Cisca property.
The Ciscas brought an action for damages against Park Manor. The appellees in this action were notified of the suit and advised the appellant, now the owner of Park Manor, that they denied any liability and informed him of their defense. Park Manor concluded this litigation by entering into a settlement agreement with the ...