Trustees of Horton's Estate v. Sherwin

• Decision Date: 13 February 1917
• Docket Number: 7202.
• Parties: TRUSTEES OF HORTON'S ESTATE v. SHERWIN.
• Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court

164 P. 469

63 Okla. 259, 1917 OK 154

TRUSTEES OF HORTON'S ESTATE v. SHERWIN.

No. 7202.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

February 13, 1917

Rehearing Denied May 1, 1917.

Syllabus by the Court.

The measure of damages for the breach of an obligation arising from contract, except where otherwise expressly provided, is the amount which will compensate the party aggrieved for all the detriment proximately caused thereby, or which in the ordinary course of things would be likely to result therefrom.

Where an action is founded upon the breach of a written contract to accept and pay for certain construction work, plaintiff is not entitled to recover exemplary damages, attorney's fees, and interest paid on money borrowed, as a result of the breach, to meet his obligations, as such are too remote.

Error from County Court, Love County; J. H. Harp, Judge.

Suit by H. C. Sherwin against the trustees of the estate of Horace E Horton, deceased, proprietors of the Chicago Bridge & Iron Works. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error. Modified and affirmed.

E. D Slough, of Ardmore, for plaintiffs in error.

J. C Graham and B. C. Logsdon, both of Marietta, for defendant in error.

TURNER J.

On April 7, 1914, defendant in error, H. C. Sherwin, sued "the trustees of the estate of Horace E. Horton deceased, proprietors Chicago Bridge & Iron Works," in the county court of Love county, in damages for the breach of a contract in writing. The petition substantially states that, pursuant to their contract in writing, dated January 20, 1914, wherein defendant agreed to pay plaintiff $5.94 per cubic yard to do certain concrete work and excavations necessary thereto in Marietta, plaintiff constructed 43 1/3 yards of concrete, aggregating $258.40, and excavated 80 cubic yards of earth, aggregating $40; that the work was completed and tendered about March 1, 1914, at which time there was due and owing plaintiff $298.40 under the contract that thereupon defendant refused to accept or pay for the work and in so doing breached the contract with plaintiff so to do; that as a result of the breach, plaintiff was compelled to borrow money and pay interest thereon to meet his obligations and to employ counsel to bring this suit, all at a cost of $52.50; that, in performing the contract, he had complied strictly with the plans and specifications prepared by defendant; and that the estimates for the work, when finished, were duly approved by the mayor of the city and the engineer in charge of the work, and duly forwarded to defendant, as required by the contract. But that, disregarding the contract, defendant refused to pay and, within seven days after the work was finished, injured, defaced, and destroyed the same to within about a foot of the bottom thereof, which was retained and used as a foundation of certain concrete work afterwards thereupon erected by defendant. By reason of all of which plaintiff was brought into public disrepute, contempt, and ridicule as a concrete worker, to his damage as a contractor $500, in all, $850.90, for which he prayed judgment. After demurrer to the third and fourth paragraphs of the petition, wherein plaintiff sought to recover, as damages, $52.50 for attorney's fees and interest on borrowed money and $500...