Baker v. Herty
This text of 1 D.C. 249 (Baker v. Herty) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The Court refused. Kilty, C. J., doubting as to the evidence respecting alterations in the two first stories, the. original agreement being for a two-story house.
The whole extra work, whether it consist in alterations or additions to the original plan, or bill of particulars is within the covenant; but as no persons have been chosen to ascertain the value of the extra work under that covenant, the [250]*250plaintiff is not deprived of his original cause of action on a quantum meruit, and can only resort to the covenant for damages against the defendant for not appointing a person on his part to ascertain the value of the extra work. The defendant, in not paying for such work, has not committed any breach of that covenant.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1 D.C. 249, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baker-v-herty-dcd-1805.