Legal Opinion

Curry v. Olmstead

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Decided October 31, 1904PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Covenant. Heard on petition of defendant for new trial.

1Per curiam

This is an action of covenant, brought to recover upon a sealed contract a balance due for building a house. There was great delay in the work, and it was not in all respects satisfactorily done. Part of the delay was attributed to change of plans and extra work required by the owner. The presiding justice ruled that, in consequence of the extra work required to be performed, the plaintiff was entitled to additional time and that the jury should determine what was a reasonable time for the completion of the contract in consideration of the extra work. The defendant’s exception to this ruling…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Roberts v. Security Trust & Savings BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
  2. United States v. CunninghamCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1941
  3. Wm. P. Jungclaus Co. v. RattiIndiana Court of Appeals · 1918
  4. Austin-Griffith, Inc. v. GoldbergSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1953
  5. Chapman Decorative Co. v. Security Mut. Life Ins.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1906

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

Powered by the Exa API