Cornish v. Suydam
| Decision Date | 02 May 1893 |
| Citation | 99 Ala. 620,13 So. 118 |
| Parties | CORNISH ET AL. v. SUYDAM. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from city court of Birmingham; H. A. Sharpe, Judge.
Action by W. H. Suydam against W. K. Cornish and others to recover on a contract for the erection of a house, and to enforce a mechanic's lien. Defendants pleaded the general issue and also sought to recoup damages for plaintiff's failure to finish the contract within the time specified therein. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. Affirmed.
Wade & Vaughan, for appellants.
W. R Houghton, for appellee.
The contract of September 25, 1890, stipulated for the completion of the house "ready for occupancy" within 60 days from that date,-that is, by the 24th day of November 1890,-according to the architect's plans and specifications. It seems that these plans and specifications did not provide for, contemplate, or require the finishing of the second story of the building in respect of the plastering, casing, and hanging of the doors and windows wainscoting, etc., nor that the last coat of paint of lead and oil on the whole exterior of the building should be put on by the contractor, Suydam. On November 25, 1890, the day after the time limited in the first contract for the completion thereunder of the house, the parties entered into another contract, by the terms of which the contractor, for an additional consideration, undertook to do this plastering, casing, and hanging doors and windows, wainscoting, etc., in the second story, and "to paint last coat on house with lead and oil for ten ($10) dollars extra on contract." The contract here referred to is manifestly that of September, 1890. Nothing was said at the time of this second contract to the effect that it was a waiver of the time stipulated in the first for the completion of the house; but the trial court properly held that the second contract was itself such waiver, and that, instead of the original stipulation in this regard, the effect of the last contract was to substitute a stipulation for completion within a reasonable time. It is obvious that the contract of September 25th did not provide for or contemplate the full completion of the house at all, but only to the extent covered by the specifications, which made no provision for finishing the second story, or for putting on the final coat of paint over the entire building. The second contract was intended to take the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Moore v. Williamson
... ... years, and that such contract was subject to modification by ... the mutual assent of the parties. In Cornish v ... Suydam, 99 Ala. 621, 13 So. 118, Badders v ... Davis, 88 Ala. 367, 6 So. 834, and Clark v ... Jones, 85 Ala. 127, 4 So. 771, there were ... ...
- Pine Bluff Hotel Company v. Monk & Ritchie
-
Walker v. J. P. Bailey Co
...831, 98 Eng. C. L. 539; Pinckney v. Dambmann, 72 Md. 173, 19 Atl. 450; Mfg. Co. v. U. S., 17 Wall. (U. S.) 592, 21 L. Ed. 715; Cornish v. Suydam, 99 Ala. 620, 13 South. 118. The learned trial judge, however, held that the letter itself was a complete waiver. In doing so he overlooked the fa......
-
Gude & Walker v. J.F. Bailey Co.
... ... S. 831, 98 Eng. C. L. 539; Pinckney v ... Dambmann, 72 Md. 173, 19 A. 450; Mfg. Co. v. U.S ... , 17 Wall. (U. S.) 592, 21 L.Ed. 715; Cornish v ... Suydam, 99 Ala. 620, 13 So. 118. The learned trial ... judge, however, held that the letter itself was a complete ... waiver. In doing so ... ...