Burns v. Thorndike

117 N.E. 799, 228 Mass. 552, 1917 Mass. LEXIS 1248
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedNovember 27, 1917
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 117 N.E. 799 (Burns v. Thorndike) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Burns v. Thorndike, 117 N.E. 799, 228 Mass. 552, 1917 Mass. LEXIS 1248 (Mass. 1917).

Opinion

Braley, J.

By the terms of the contract: “If any extra work is required, a price for the same must be agreed upon and approved in writing by the architect before such work is begun.” It was not within the authority of the architect to waive this provision, and although he orally approved all extra work and the disbursements for which recovery is sought, the defendant never has waived the contract nor ratified his acts.

It follows that the plaintiffs cannot recover. Stuart v. Cambridge, 125 Mass. 102.

Order dismissing the report affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Harold L. Baker Co. v. Meledones
34 Mass. App. Dec. 103 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div., 1966)
Jackson Materials Co. v. Grand River Dam Authority
1945 OK 228 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1945)
Crane Construction Co. v. Commonwealth
195 N.E. 110 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1935)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
117 N.E. 799, 228 Mass. 552, 1917 Mass. LEXIS 1248, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burns-v-thorndike-mass-1917.