# Acchione and Canuso v. COM., DEPT. OF TR.

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · April 25, 1983 · 501 Pa. 337

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9767238

## Case

- **Full name:** ACCHIONE AND CANUSO, INC., Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Appellee
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** April 25, 1983
- **Citations:** 501 Pa. 337; 461 A.2d 765; 1983 Pa. LEXIS 524
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Flaherty
- **Judges:** Roberts, Nix, Flaherty, McDer-mott, Zappala, Larsen, Hutchinson
- **Cited by:** 10 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9767238

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that contractor entitled to recover for damages where increased expenses incurred by contractor were a “direct result” of the reliance on the misrepresented bid specification

## Opinion text

FLAHERTY, Justice,
dissenting.
I dissent. The opinion authored by Mr. Justice Zappala too broadly construes the concept of constructive fraud recognized by this Court in Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission v. Smith, 350 Pa. 355 , 39 A.2d 139 (1944) (actual knowledge of misrepresentations present). In the instant case, there is simply no evidence that PennDOT knew that sub *348 stantially more than half of the conduit was not reusable; hence, an inference of fraud has no factual basis. Appellant knew that the additional trenching would be paid for at the contract unit price unless an increase was negotiated when the additional work was ordered. By failing to seek such a price adjustment, appellant bore the risk of increased costs.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9767238. Public record. Not legal advice.