Casey v. McFarlane Bros. Co.
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Action to recover for alleged extra work and material in the erection of a building, brought to and tried by the Superior Court in Fairfield County, Burpee, J.; facts found and judgment rendered for the plaintiff, and appeal by the defendant.
1Opinion of the CourtRoraback, J.
This action was brought to recover for extra work and materials alleged to have been furnished and rendered in connection with the erection of a certain factory building for the defendant.
The only question presented by the appeal is whether the court erred in holding that the furnishing and laying of certain brick by the plaintiffs was an “extra” for which the defendant was liable to pay. The defendant contended that this alleged extra work was included in the contract between the parties, and that the plaintiffs could not recover because of the provisions of article three of this contract,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Mahoney v. Hartford Investment CorporationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1909
- Beattie v. McMullenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1907
- Boody v. Rutland & Burlington RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1853
3Cited by14 opinions
- State v. AvcollieSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1979
- Cecio Bros. v. Town of GreenwichSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1968
- Connecticut Light & Power Co. v. ProctorSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2016
- Wexler Construction Co. v. Housing AuthoritySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1962
- Charter Oak Estates, Inc. v. KearneySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1971
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.