Riesen v. City of Milwaukee
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the superior court of Milwaukee county: J. 0. Ludwig, Judge. The plaintiff built the city hall in the city of Milwaukee in pursuance of a written contract, and has received the contract price therefor, and brings this action to recover $3,800 and interest, being the extra cost of putting hydraulic elevators into the building instead of steam elevators, his claim being that he was only required by his contract to put in steam elevators, and that he…
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the superior court of Milwaukee county: J. 0. Ludwig, Judge. The plaintiff built the city hall in the city of Milwaukee in pursuance of a written contract, and has received the contract price therefor, and brings this action to recover $3,800 and interest, being the extra cost of putting hydraulic elevators into the building instead of steam elevators, his claim being that he was only required by his contract to put in steam elevators, and that he was afterwards required by the common council to put in hydraulic elevators. There is really no dispute as to the facts,…
1Opinion of the CourtWinslow, J.
The plaintiff’s claim is that the building contract gave him the option as to whether steam or hy*655draulic elevators should be used in the building, and this is the only question we find it necessary to consider. It is certainly true that where an obligation is in the alternative, i. e. to do one thing or another, the right of election (at least up to the time when the contract is to be discharged) is with the promisor, unless the contract expressly or by necessary implication vests the right elsewhere. Dessert v. Scott, 58 Wis. 390; Drake v. Harrison, 69 Wis. 99. The contract in question is to…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Drake v. HarrisonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1887
- Dessert v. ScottWisconsin Supreme Court · 1883