Heman v. Compton Hill Improvement Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Si. Louis County Circuit Court. — Hon. Eudolph Hirzel, Judge. (1) The plaintiff, having entered into a special contract and failed to perform it, can recover as on quantum meruit only if the work is of value to the defendant, and then only to the extent of such value; and if the work is of no value to the defendant, there can be no recovery.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Si. Louis County Circuit Court. — Hon. Eudolph Hirzel, Judge. (1) The plaintiff, having entered into a special contract and failed to perform it, can recover as on quantum meruit only if the work is of value to the defendant, and then only to the extent of such value; and if the work is of no value to the defendant, there can be no recovery. Yeats v. Ballentine, 56 Mo. 530, 538, 539; Marsh v. Bichareis, 29 Mo. 99-105; Callahan v. Morse, 37 Mo.App. 206; Globe, etc., Co. v. Loud, 47 Mo. App. 439; Haysler v. Owen, 61 Mo. 274; Kelly v. Town of Bradford, 33 Yt. 35; 2 Parsons on…
1Opinion of the CourtBond, J.
The plaintiff sued the defendant for the reasonable value of work and labor done and materials furnished as set forth in the items of account stated in his petition, aggregating $27,223.65, from which accounts certain credits, aggregating $24,000, were deducted, leaving a balance due on said account of *482$3,223.65. It was further alleged that this balance had been assigned to the plaintiff by Olaus Yieths, in whose favor said account accrued against defendant, and judgment was prayed therefor.
The answer of the defendant was a general denial, and a further defense that defendant entered into a…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Williams v. Chicago, Santa Fe & California Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1892
- Yeats v. BallentineSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874
- Linnenkohl v. WinkelmeyerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1893
3Cited by1 opinion
- Buschmann v. BrayMissouri Court of Appeals · 1896