McGuinness v. Shannon
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract to recover a balance due under a building contract. Trial in the Superior Court, before Blodgett, J., who ruled, against the defendant’s objection, that a certain claim of the defendant could not be sustained upon evidence introduced by him, and directed the jury not to consider it; and, after a verdict for the plaintiff, the defendant alleged exceptions. The nature of the claim and the evidence appears in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtAllen, J.
The plaintiff built a house for the defendant for a fixed price, under a written contract and specifications which did not require him to do the papering; and he now sues to recover the balance due therefor. The defendant seeks to deduct fifty dollars, that being the sum paid by him for papering the house. To sustain this claim of deduction, he offered evidence tending to show that on the day when the contract was executed, and before the parties separated, the plaintiff orally agreed to do the papering also, or to allow the defendant fifty dollars for doing it. The defendant now contends…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Frost v. BrighamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1885
- Fitz v. ComeyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
3Cited by2 opinions
- Thomas v. BarnesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
- Dixon v. WilliamsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1899