Cambria Savings & Loan Association v. Estate Of Gross

439 A.2d 1236 (1982)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

H (D) had a health problem and was at home recuperating and anticipating his return to work. D was approached by a contractor to put aluminum siding on his home. H and W discussed the improvements with the contractor’s agent, Datz. They agreed upon the work and the price, but D took the precaution of adding a clause to the contract; the contract was null and void if customer cannot get disability and death and sickness insurance...customer to pay for insurance. There is no dispute that customer was meant to be D. A contract was signed on October 6, 1971, and along with it was an assignment of the debt to Cambria (P). D called his insurance agent, Mulligan, and sent a check to initiate placement of the insurance. A few days later the work crew showed up, and D sent them away, as he had not yet gotten the insurance. They appeared again a few days later, and after a conversation between D, Mulligan, and Datz, D permitted the work to begin. The siding was in place one week after the signing of the contract. D returned to work on November 1, 1971, but after ten days became permanently disabled. He remained unemployed until his death by suicide in 1979. D had signed a Completion Certificate. On December 23, 1971, D was informed that he was denied insurance and his check was returned. Mulligan testified at trial that there was no standard term to determine coverage, but the purchaser must know within six months. Mulligan also testified that acceptance of coverage relates back to the date of the application. The contractor testified that he knew of the handwritten clause in the contract and that is was his decision to send the crew to do the work. That party also later admitted that D had never orally or in writing waived the clause. Datz admitted that D never waived the clause. Apparently, the verdict went to P below on grounds related to quasi-contract and D appealed.