Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

WHITEMARSH TOWNSHIP AUTHORITY v. FINELLI BROTHERS (09/25/62)

September 25, 1962

WHITEMARSH TOWNSHIP AUTHORITY, APPELLANT,
v.
FINELLI BROTHERS, INC.



Appeal, No. 218, Jan. T., 1962, from judgment of Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County, Sept. T., 1958, No. 461, in case of Whitemarsh Township Authority v. Finelli Brothers, Inc. and American Casualty Company of Reading. Judgment affirmed.

COUNSEL

John P. Yatsko, with him Elmer L. Menges, for appellant.

Sidney L. Wickenhaver, with him John S. Estey, Henry Stuckert Miller, and Montgomery, McCracken, Walker & Rhoads, for appellee.

Edward H. Cushman, with him Robert F. Cushman, and Cushman & Obert, and Fox, Differ, DiGiacomo & Lowe, for insurance company, appellee.

Before Bell, C.j., Musmanno, Jones, Cohen, Eagen and O'brien, JJ.

Author: Eagen

[ 408 Pa. Page 374]

OPINION BY MR. JUSTICE EAGEN

Whitemarsh Township Authority (hereinafter referred to as the Authority) created pursuant to the Municipality Authorities Act of May 2, 1945, P.L. 382, § 10, as amended, 53 P.S. § 312, by public advertisement

[ 408 Pa. Page 375]

    invited the submission of sealed bids to enter into a written contract for the construction of a sanitary sewer system in the township. The return date was February 13, 1958.

The instructions to bidders contained in Section 10 the following: "10. Form of Proposal All bids must be submitted on one of the two separately bound pamphlets containing a copy of the proposal form and not on the proposal form bound within the specifications. No proposal will be considered which is submitted otherwise than on the prepared form of proposal and in the designated manner. The blank spaces in the proposal shall be filled in correctly where indicated for each and every item for which a description is given, and the bidder must state the prices for which he proposes to do each part of the work contemplated, and the total amount for all the parts included in any or all of the combinations of the work. In case of discrepancy, the written word shall be considered as being the bid price. The bidder shall sign his proposal correctly. If the proposal is made by an individual, in addition to his signature, his post office address must be shown; if made by a firm or partnership, the post office address of each member of the firm or partnership; if made by a corporation, the person signing the proposal must be the President or Vice President of the Corporation. No proposal will be considered which is not based upon the complete plans and specifications, or which contains any qualifying letter or written memorandum not permitted in these specifications, or which is not properly made out and signed in writing by the bidder...."*fn1

In another section, these instructions provided: "Proposals may*fn2 be rejected if they show any omissions, alterations of form, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.