Benner v. Schmidt

The plaintiffs in error, complainants below, by a written contract with the defendant, made April 21,1889, undertook to furnish and put in place (as their- petition stated), some iron for buildings of the defendant.

The contract itself, attached as an exhibit to the petition, only required them to furnish the iron. During the year 1889 they did all that was required of them, either by their contract or by the mechanic’s lien law, but not punctually as the contract provided. Their material went into the building. If the defendant suffered any damage by the delay, he may recoup such damage out…