Barnett v. Sweringen
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Daniel D. Fisher, Judge. Where a contract has been fully completed on the part of the plaintiff and nothing remains but the payment of the stipulated price he may sue in assumpsit: and on the other hand if plaintiff has not in every respect fulfilled his contract, still if defendant has possessed and enjoyed the results thereof, then plaintiff can recover what his services, labor or material were reasonably worth, less any…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Daniel D. Fisher, Judge. Where a contract has been fully completed on the part of the plaintiff and nothing remains but the payment of the stipulated price he may sue in assumpsit: and on the other hand if plaintiff has not in every respect fulfilled his contract, still if defendant has possessed and enjoyed the results thereof, then plaintiff can recover what his services, labor or material were reasonably worth, less any damages resulting to defendant from plaintiff’s failure to comply with his contract: and therefore in the case at bar…
1Opinion of the CourtBiggs, J.
The cause of action stated in the second count of the petition is in assumpsit to recover for services rendered by plaintiff as an architect in drawing the plans and specifications for two houses which the defendant erected, and for superintending their construction. The action is in form as for a quantum meruit. The plaintiff alleges that the reasonable value of his services is $1,593.70; that of said sum the defendant has paid $700, leaving a balance due plaintiff of $893.70, for which he asks judgment.
The answer contains a general denial. It was further alleged that plaintiff and the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Mansur v. BottsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- Plummer v. TrostSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
- Nolan v. JohnsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Coleman v. DraneSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- Crump v. RebstockMissouri Court of Appeals · 1885
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Merrick v. Bridgeways, Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1951
- Brug v. Manufacturers Bank & Trust CompanySupreme Court of Missouri · 1970
- Brug v. Manufacturers Bank & Trust CompanySupreme Court of Missouri · 1970
- Poll v. InglishMissouri Court of Appeals · 1926
- State v. HolzwarthSupreme Court of Missouri · 1975
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.