From our private database of 14,200+ case briefs...
Fairview Park Excavating Co. v. Al Monzo Construction Co.
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
560 F.2d 1122 (1977)
Fairview Park Excavating Co. (Fairview) (plaintiff) performed work as the subcontractor for a contract secured by Al Monzo Construction Co. (Monzo) (defendant/cross-claimant). Monzo secured this contract with Robinson Township, Pennsylvania (Township) (defendant/cross-claimee). When Fairview was not paid for its work, Fairview sued Monzo, the Township, and Maryland Casualty Co. (defendant), which was the surety on Monzo’s bond. Monzo and Maryland Casualty filed a counterclaim, alleging that Fairview did not perform its work properly. Monzo and Maryland Casualty also cross-claimed against the Township. The Township counterclaimed against Monzo, alleging damages based on defective work. On the first day of trial, the court dismissed Fairview's complaint against the Township under Pennsylvania state law, which stated that a subcontractor could not sue a city because there is no privity of contract between the two parties. On the same day, the district court dismissed Monzo's cross-claim against the Township, stating that there was no longer diversity jurisdiction, and that the matters should be resolved in state court. After the trial on Fairview's complaint against Monzo, the court entered judgment in Fairview's favor. The court subsequently denied a motion by Monzo and Maryland Casualty for a new trial. Monzo appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. At oral argument on the appeal, the court learned that Monzo had won a judgment against the Township in Pennsylvania state court for the same relief that Monzo had requested in its federal cross-claim.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Garth, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 237,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,200 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.