Mailander v. Continental State Bank of Beckville
Court of Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the CourtLevy, J.
(after stating the facts as above). The appellant agreed to take down and reset the bank fixtures of the appellee, and to provide the new material necessary to adapt the fixtures to the alterations, for the “actual cost plus twenty per cent.” of doing the job. The appellant, in making up the actual cost of the job, in addition to “plus twenty per cent.,” charged the appellee' with a certain proportion of the ordinary expenses of operating his factory and business, denominated “overhead expense.” The question to be determined is whether the appellant was entitled to charge the appellee for the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- State v. StorySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1951
- Kubela v. Schuessler Lumber Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1973
- Denemark v. Ed B. Mooney, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1951
- Opinion No., Arkansas Attorney General Reports2007