Crouse, Inc. v. School Dist. of Borough of Braddock

• Decision Date: 14 April 1941
• Docket Number: 78
• Parties: Crouse, Inc., Appellant, v. Braddock Borough School District
• Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court

19 A.2d 843

341 Pa. 497

Crouse, Inc., Appellant, v. Braddock Borough School District

No. 78

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

April 14, 1941

Argued March 28, 1941.

Appeal, No. 78, March T., 1941, from judgment of C.P Allegheny Co., July T., 1938, No. 194, in case of Wayne Crouse, Inc., v. School District of Braddock Borough. Judgment affirmed.

Assumpsit. Before KENNEDY, J.

The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts.

Verdict directed for defendant and judgment entered thereon. Plaintiff appealed.

Error assigned, among others, was the action of the trial judge in directing a verdict for defendant.

The judgment is affirmed.

Max U Applebaum, for appellant.

I Edward Roth and Leo Kostman, for appellee, were not heard.

Before MAXEY, DREW, LINN, STERN, PATTERSON and PARKER, JJ.

OPINION

MR. MAXEY, JUSTICE.

Plaintiff corporation brought an action in assumpsit to recover damages in the sum of $4,787.92, with interest thereon from March 10, 1938, based on an alleged breach of contractual relations between it and defendant School District of the Borough of Braddock. No answer was filed by defendant.

Defendant advertised for bids for plumbing and heating work on a proposed new school building according to plans and specifications prepared and submitted by its architect. Plaintiff's bid was the lowest of five submitted and considered by the school district and at a meeting of its Board of Directors on February 28, 1938, the following minute was entered: "On motion of Roderus and Polk the plumbing contract be awarded to Wayne Crouse the lowest responsible bidder for the amount of $20,980.00. All ayes."

The school district through its secretary verbally notified the plaintiff to proceed to execute the written contracts prepared and secure materialmen and performance bonds. The officers of plaintiff corporation proceeded to do this the morning after the meeting at which the award was made to it. The Plumbers' Union protested to the school board that if the school district persisted in the award labor difficulties would be experienced. The secretary and the architect consulted with the plaintiff corporation's representatives but the latter's efforts with the union were unsuccessful and the school district was so notified.

The following appears on the minutes of the meeting of the Board of Directors of the school district held on March 10, 1938: "It was regularly moved and seconded by Wrobleski and Andolina that the action of the board in awarding the plumbing contract of the Junior High School Building to Wayne & Crouse, Inc., on February 28, 1938, be rescinded because of the finding after investigation that they are not the lowest responsible bidder, in that they cannot perform the said contract. All ayes. On motion of Wrobleski and Polk the plumbing contract be given to the next lowest bidder, W. J. Costello for the sum of $21,285.00. Ayes: Andolina, Polk, Schweinberg, Wrobleski and Carr. Nays, Roderus. Not voting, Mrs. Gilmore."

The secretary of the School Board then promptly notified the plaintiff corporation of the action of the Board in a letter which stated, inter alia: "You of course are familiar with the reasons that necessitated this action on the part of the Board."

It is admitted that there was no formal written contract executed by the school district and plaintiff company, but the latter contended that the motion awarding the plumbing contract to "Wayne Crouse" sufficiently established a contract between it and the school district, for the reason that the form of the contract later to be executed was attached to the specifications upon which the plaintiff bid. Plaintiff alleged further "that the action and resolution rescinding the award by and contract of the defendant, and the granting of a new award, was illegal, void and not based upon any fact or right in the defendant," and...