Legal Opinion

Hubert v. Aitken

New York Court of Common Pleas

Decided May 6, 1889PublishedCited by 7 opinions

On reargument. For former opinion, see 2 H. T. Supp. 711.

1Opinion of the Court

Larrbmore, O. J.

The point upon which chief stress was laid in the re-argument of this appeal was that of the entirety of the contract between the parties. The plaintiffs are architects, who agreed to draw the plans for, and also, according to the custom of their profession, supervise the construction of, the building referred to in the complaint. It appears that there was one grave fault in said plans, and that there were some quite serious departures from the specifications and from the best workmanship in the erection of said building. The learned counsel for appellant, therefore, argues…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Woodward v. . FullerNew York Court of Appeals · 1880

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Scott & Payne v. Potomac Insurance Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Board of Education v. Sargent, Webster, Crenshaw & FolleyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
  3. Nave v. McGraneIdaho Supreme Court · 1910
  4. Block v. HappSupreme Court of Georgia · 1915
  5. Henon v. VernonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1918

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API