Wong v. Paisner
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1Opinion of the Court
*9241. The jury could have found that the plaintiff agreed to prepare certain mechanical drawings for the defendant for a lump sum payment of $1,000. The plaintiff claimed, however, that there was a modification of the agreement by which an hourly rate payment was substituted for the lump sum payment. The defendant denied any such modification but testified that he agreed to an additional lump sum payment of $500. The plaintiff sent the defendant a bill in the amount of $5,400, representing 235 hours of work at $25 per hour, less the $500 that had already been paid. The defendant testified that…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Worcester Color Co. v. Henry Wood's Sons Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
- Torre v. Harris-Seybold Co.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1980
- Whittaker Chain Tread Co. v. Standard Auto Supply Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1913
- Rosenblatt v. Holstein Rubber Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1933
- Sherman v. SidmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1938
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Community Builders, Inc. v. Indian Motocycle Associates, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1998
- Williams v. B & K Medical Systems, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 2000
- Silva & Santos, Inc. v. PreviteMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1993
- Bud McDevitt Real Estate, Inc. v. CoronaMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1989
- Feygina v. Hallmark Health System, Inc.Massachusetts Superior Court · 2013
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.