Shafer Elec. & Constr. v. Mantia, 78 A.3d 1043 (Pa. 2013). · Go Syfert
Search
Shafer Elec. & Constr. v. Mantia, 78 A.3d 1043 (Pa. 2013). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
2 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Shafer Elec. & Constr. v. Mantia, 96 A.3d 989 (Pa. 2014)
How cited ↗
Cited for
At page 1043 ORDER PER CURIAM. AND NOW, this 29th day of October, 2013, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issues are: (1) Whether the Home Improvement…1 citing caseopening of page *1043 (no citing court says what it cites this page for)
  • Shafer Elec. & Constr. v. Mantia, 96 A.3d 989 (Pa. 2014).published
    Appellants filed a petition for allowance of appeal with this Court, which we granted to consider the following, interrelated issues: (1) Whether the Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act, 73 P.S. §§ 517.1-517.18, bars a contractor from…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
SHAFER ELECTRIC & CONSTRUCTION
v.
Raymond MANTIA and Donna Mantia, Husband and Wife
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Oct 29, 2013.
Published opinion
78 A.3d 1043
2013 WL 5806466
2013 Pa. LEXIS 2493
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 29th day of October, 2013, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issues are:

(1) Whether the Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act, 73 Pa. Stat. §§ 517.1-517.18, bars a contractor from recovery under a theory of quantum meruit in the absence of a valid and enforceable home improvement contract under the Act[.]
[*1044] (2) Whether the decisions of the Superi- or Court of Pennsylvania in Shafer Electric & Construction v. Mantia, [67 A.3d 8] (Pa.Super.Ct.2013), and Durst v. Milroy, 52 A.3d 357, 2012 PA Super 179 (Pa.Super.Ct.2012), conflict with the Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act, 73 Pa. Stat. §§ 517.7(a) and (g), and should be overturned by this Court[.]