Martus v. Houck

The controversy here arises out of a contract for the building of a house of worship. The defendant in error was the contractor, and sued to recover the contract price, claiming to have fully performed on his part.' The building had never been accepted, and the defense was that it did not correspond with the contract.

In the following particulars variances between the contract and the performance appear to have been established:

The building was to have fifteen windows, and it had but thirteen.

*433The floor was to be of pine lumber, an inch and a half thick, and it was but an inch and a quarter.

Outs…