Jones v. Guice

CAYTON, Chief Judge.

This was a suit by a subcontractor for the value of certain plumbing work performed for defendant. The defense was that the work had not been ordered by defendant, that the principal contractor had been fully paid for his work, and that because there was no written authorization by defendant the claim was under the ban of the statute of frauds.

For the plaintiff the testimony was that the job in question was not included in the plans or blueprints covering the principal contract; that while the job was in progress defendant approached one of plaintiff’s employees, a plumber…