Gibney v. Turner
This text of 52 Ark. 117 (Gibney v. Turner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The rule in cases of this kind is that plaintiff, if he prove the existence of a contract for a specific sum, for the performance of specific work, is entitled for. the breach thereof by his employer to damages equal to the difference between the cost of the work and the price to be paid for it; the cost being the market value of the material on hand and the amount that would have been paid for labor and material in completing the contract, and the value to him of his own time that would have been consumed in completing the contract. Gardenhire v. Smith, 39 Ark., 280; Brodie v. Watkins, 33 ib., 545. The value of the time is what he gained or might have gained by the saving of his time not employed in completing the contract. Reverse and remand for further proceedings.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
52 Ark. 117, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gibney-v-turner-ark-1889.