Dame v. Wood

The first time this case was before the court it was. said the plaintiff could not recover unless he showed that the parties must have understood the heating apparatus was to be accepted from day to day as the work progressed. Dame v. Woods 73 N. II. 222, 221. What must be intended by this is that he can recover if he shows that the boiler, radiators, and piping became a part of the defendant’s real estate at the time they were put in place; for the theory of that decision is that the plaintiff cannot recover unless lie proves he has conferred a benefit on the defendant. The only possible way…