Hawes Elec. Co. v. Angell
| Citation | 332 Mass. 190,124 N.E.2d 257 |
| Parties | HAWES ELECTRIC CO. v. Christine P. ANGELL. HAWES ELECTRIC CO. v. William P. ANGELL. |
| Decision Date | 07 February 1955 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts |
John B. Nunes and Harold T. Gilley, New Bedford, for defendants.
These are actions of contract, begun on June 11, 1952, brought respectively against a wife and her husband, to recover $1,778.77 for labor and materials furnished to them by the plaintiff. The only item now in dispute is one of $1,281.50 for "oil burner... installed." The defendants contended that the work was not done in a workmanlike manner and that the contract was not performed, and claimed damages in recoupment therefor. In addition the defendants contended that the work was done in violation of law. In each case the plaintiff obtained a verdict for $1,766.59. The defendants alleged exceptions.
General Laws (Ter.Ed.) c. 148, § 10, as it appears in St.1945, c. 710, § 4, empowers the board of fire prevention regulations to make regulations relative to fire prevention. By section 30, as amended by St.1945, c. 710, § 13, violation of such a regulation is made punishable by fine, and such a regulation may be enforced by the Superior Court in equity. Rule 8 of Section 2 of such regulations provides that whoever desires to install a fuel oil burner must obtain a permit from the head of the fire department. Rule 10 of Section 2 provides that no permit for the use of fuel oil in connection with any fuel oil burner shall be issued until a certificate of completion shall have been furnished by the person to whom was issued a permit for installation. There was evidence that the plaintiff never applied to the head of the fire department for a permit for installation of a fuel oil burner, and that the plaintiff never furnished a certificate of completion to the head of the fire department. The plaintiff did not contradict that evidence.
The installation was completed on April 30, 1951. There was evidence tending to show that the price of the burner was $1,150 and the cost of installation $131.50. But there was evidence tending to show that the price of the burner and its installation were included in an entire price of $1,281.50. Clearly the plaintiff violated the regulations by failing to obtain any permit for installation or to furnish any certificate of completion. Therefore the plaintiff cannot recover for its services in installation. Tocci v. Lembo, 325 Mass. 707, 92 N.E.2d 254. And if the contract was an entire one for burner and installation, a violation of the regulations as to installation will prevent the plaintiff from recovering anything on the entire contract, at...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hastings Associates, Inc. v. Local 369 Bldg. Fund, Inc., 94-P-219
...from the plaintiff's improper use of the defendant's club license used to generate that value. See Hawes Elec. Co. v. Angell, 332 Mass. 190, 191-192, 124 N.E.2d 257 (1955). As such, we perceive no basis for concluding that the renewal provision is severable. Even though the renewal provisio......
-
Green v. Richmond
...incidental part of the performance of the agreement. Tocci v. Lembo, 325 Mass. 707, 92 N.E.2d 254 (1950); Hawes Elec. Co. v. Angell, 332 Mass. 190, 191--192, 124 N.E.2d 257 (1955). The question whether the illegality was serious or more than an incidental part of the performance has been he......
-
Frishman v. Maginn, 08-P-307.
...are substantially beyond dispute, it was for the judge to rule as matter of law on the consequence"). See also Hawes Elec. Co. v. Angell, 332 Mass. 190, 192, 124 N.E.2d 257 (1955). 17. Wei, for example, is precisely the type of investor targeted for protection by regulation D. At the time o......
-
City of Westfield v. Harris & Associates Painting, Civil Action No. 07-30241-MAP.
...to pay contractor, and despite lack of certificate of need because construction had not yet commenced); Hawes Elec. Co. v. Angell, 332 Mass. 190, 124 N.E.2d 257, 259 (1954) (noting that judge must decide whether failure to comply with regulations requiring permit and certificate of completi......