W. V. Pangborne & Co. v. Wark & Co.

334 A.2d 247, 460 Pa. 588, 1975 Pa. LEXIS 700
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedMarch 18, 1975
DocketAppeal No. 121
StatusPublished

This text of 334 A.2d 247 (W. V. Pangborne & Co. v. Wark & Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
W. V. Pangborne & Co. v. Wark & Co., 334 A.2d 247, 460 Pa. 588, 1975 Pa. LEXIS 700 (Pa. 1975).

Opinions

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Having examined the record, we are of opinion that the parties to this appeal agreed to arbitrate disputes arising under the contract between them and that the claims which the appellee seeks to arbitrate are not excluded from the arbitration agreement by any provision of the Subcontract, including Article IX. See generally Flightways Corp. v. Keystone Helicopter Corp., 460 Pa. 660, 331 A.2d 184 [filed January 27, 1975]; Borough of Ambridge Water Authority v. Columbia, Pa., 328 A.2d 498 (1974).

Decree affirmed. Costs on appellant.

ROBERTS, J., filed a dissenting opinion.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Flightways Corp. v. Keystone Helicopter Corp.
331 A.2d 184 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1975)
Commonwealth v. Walker
334 A.2d 282 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1975)
Ambridge Borough Water Authority v. Columbia
328 A.2d 498 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1974)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
334 A.2d 247, 460 Pa. 588, 1975 Pa. LEXIS 700, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/w-v-pangborne-co-v-wark-co-pa-1975.