Legal Opinion

Plante v. Jacobs

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided June 7, 1960PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHallows, J.

The defendants argue that the plaintiff cannot recover any amount because he has failed to substantially perform the contract. The plaintiff conceded he failed to furnish the kitchen cabinets, gutters and downspouts, sidewalk, closet clothes poles, and entrance' seat amounting to $1,601.95. This amount was allowed to the defendants. The defendants claim some 20 other items of incomplete or faulty performance by the plaintiff and no substantial performance because the cost of completing the house in strict compliance with the plans and specifications would amount to 25 or 30 per cent of the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Manning v. School District No. 6Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1905
  2. Valentine v. Patrick Warren Construction Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
  3. Manitowoc Steam Boiler Works v. Manitowoc Glue Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1903
  4. Nees v. WeaverWisconsin Supreme Court · 1936
  5. Manthey v. StockWisconsin Supreme Court · 1907

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. National Chain Co. v. CampbellSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1985
  2. Micro-Managers, Inc. v. GregoryCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1988
  3. Klug & Smith Co. v. SommerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1978
  4. De Sombre v. BickelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
  5. Stevens Construction Corp. v. Carolina Corp.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1974

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API