Fagerholm v. Nielson
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Action under the common counts and a bill of particulars to recover a balance alleged, to be due upon a contract for work and materials in papering and painting apartmerjt houses of the defendant, and a further sum for extras, brought to the Court of Common Pleas in Hartford County and tried to the jury before Markham, Jverdict and judgment for the plaintiff for $479, and appeal by the defendant.
Read the full summary
Action under the common counts and a bill of particulars to recover a balance alleged, to be due upon a contract for work and materials in papering and painting apartmerjt houses of the defendant, and a further sum for extras, brought to the Court of Common Pleas in Hartford County and tried to the jury before Markham, Jverdict and judgment for the plaintiff for $479, and appeal by the defendant. The plaintiff and the defendant entered into a contract under which the plaintiff was to do the painting, papering and varnishing of two tenement blocks being built by the defendant, for the sum of…
1Opinion of the CourtGager, J.
The first two reasons of appeal are based on the refusal of the court to charge as requested by the defendant. The action is for a balance due upon a building contract, and for extras, and the plaintiff’s right to recover upon the contract depends upon substantial performance, and the right upon the extras depends upon whether they were ordered.
The first of the defendant’s requests relates merely to the essentials of a discharge of the contract by agreement, and treats of termination by agreement and substitution of a new contract. The record does not raise any such questions and there was no…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Radwick v. GoldsteinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1916
- M. J. Daly & Sons, Inc. v. New Haven Hotel Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1917
- Robinson v. BackesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1917
- Pinches v. Swedish Evangelical Lutheran ChurchSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1887
- Crotty v. City of DanburySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1906
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Sizer v. City of WaterburySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1931
- Pollak v. Danbury Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1925
- Bridgeport Hydraulic Co. v. City of BridgeportSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1925
- Draus v. International Silver Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1926
- Hine v. McNerneySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1922
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.