From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Construction v. Rockwood Borough Mun. Auth

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Jan 22, 1964
326 F.2d 751 (3d Cir. 1964)

Opinion

No. 14518.

Argued January 10, 1964.

Decided January 22, 1964.

Martin S. Goldberg, Youngstown, Ohio (Baskin, Sachs Craig, Pittsburgh, Pa., on the brief), for appellant.

Robert M. Brown, Pittsburgh, Pa. (Gustave W. Wilde, Burgwin, Ruffin, Perry Pohl, Pittsburgh, Pa., Charles H. Coffroth, Somerset, Pa., on the brief), for appellee.

Before STALEY, HASTIE and SMITH, Circuit Judges.


In granting summary judgment for the defendant in this suit by a contractor against Rockwood Borough Municipal Authority for repudiation of a public contract, the district court reasoned that no binding contract had ever come into existence.

These facts appear without dispute. The contractor was low bidder. He knew that the Authority's obtaining of necessary financing was a condition precedent to the making of a binding contract. The Authority prepared and sent to the contractor formal contracting documents for execution and return to the Authority. The contractor signed the formal contract and returned it. However, not obtaining some of the needed financing, the Authority refused to execute the contract. In these circumstances, we think the trial court properly ruled that there was no binding contract. Cf. Wayne Crouse, Inc. v. Braddock Borough School District, 1941, 341 Pa. 497, 19 A.2d 843.

The judgment will be affirmed.


Summaries of

Construction v. Rockwood Borough Mun. Auth

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Jan 22, 1964
326 F.2d 751 (3d Cir. 1964)
Case details for

Construction v. Rockwood Borough Mun. Auth

Case Details

Full title:CONSTRUCTION, INCORPORATED, An Ohio Corporation, Appellant, v. ROCKWOOD…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

Date published: Jan 22, 1964

Citations

326 F.2d 751 (3d Cir. 1964)

Citing Cases

S.E. Chicago Com'n v. Dept. of Hous. Ur. Dev.

This Court concludes that a contract never arose between LVA and the City on LVA's original proposal to build…

Istari Const., Inc. v. City of Muscatine

Because HUD refused to accept the award to Knudson, no binding award or contract was formed. See 63 C.J.S.…