Burns v. Thorndike
117 N.E. 799, 228 Mass. 552, 1917 Mass. LEXIS 1248
Opinion
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
Burns v. Thorndike, 117 N.E. 799, 228 Mass. 552, 1917 Mass. LEXIS 1248 (Mass. 1917).
117 N.E. 799 (Burns v. Thorndike) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
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)