Williams v. Thrall
| Decision Date | 11 October 1898 |
| Citation | 101 Wis. 337,76 N.W. 599 |
| Parties | WILLIAMS ET AL. v. THRALL ET AL. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from circuit court, Winnebago county; George W. Burnell, Judge.
Action by W. R. Williams and others, as copartners, against J. H. Thrall and wife, impleaded with another. From a judgment in favor of plaintiffs, defendants appeal. Reversed.Hooper & Hooper, for appellants.
Thompson, Harshaw & Thompson, for respondents.
The verified complaint is an ordinary complaint to enforce a mechanic's lien, and alleges, in effect, that the plaintiffs, as principal contractors, sold, furnished, and put into the house of the defendant Thrall the combination hot-air and hot-water heating apparatus, for the agreed price of $460, and extras to the amount of $5.25, making $465.25; that no part thereof had been paid except $300; that there was still due and unpaid $165.25,--and prayed for the customary judgment. The defendants Thrall and wife answered, to the effect: That the heater was put in the defendants' house, by the plaintiffs, under a written contract wherein they proposed, in effect, to furnish and place in the defendants' residence a combination hot-water and warm-air heating apparatus, and No. 63 Prince Royal combination furnace, and would furnish and connect the same with the registers in the several rooms designated, the work to be completed October 1, 1895, unless delayed by the defendant or from some cause for which he was responsible; that the apparatus when completed was thereby guarantied to heat the entire house to 80°, and the bath rooms to 85°, in the coldest weather, with reasonable consumption of fuel; that the furnace, with all material furnished by the plaintiffs, should remain the property of the plaintiffs, until the contract price should be fully paid, and the defendants should be liable for any damage to the apparatus after completion until that amount should be paid in full; that the price for the work should be $460, payable, $300 upon completion of the job, and $160 January 1, 1896. That it was therein further agreed that, should the furnace fail to meet the requirements as specified, the plaintiffs thereby agreed to replace the same with a heating apparatus that would fulfill the requirements, without extra cost to the defendants, and that the plaintiffs would pay for all damages caused on account of any deficiency in said furnace; that all work was to be done in a thorough, workmanlike manner. That on the same day the defendant, by his written indorsement on the back of such proposition, accepted the same, with all its conditions. That the plaintiffs failed and neglected to construct and erect such heating plant according to the terms and conditions of the contract. That, instead thereof, the one placed therein was not according to the contract, nor constructed in a good, workmanlike, and proper manner, and was entirely inadequate to heat the entire house to 80°, and the bath rooms to 85°, in the coldest weather, with reasonable consumption of fuel, and was not completed until December 26, 1895. In addition to the denials and such defense, the defendants alleged such failure to perform the contract, and the damages thereby sustained, as a counterclaim, and, among other things, that they had been damaged on account thereof, and on account of what it would cost them to construct and erect such heating apparatus according to the terms and conditions of the contract, and of the capacity and ability provided for in the contract, in the sum of $700. The plaintiffs...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nunn v. Brillhart
...of the guaranty. Park v. Richardson & Boynton Co., 81 Wis. 399, 51 N. W. 572; Seigworth v. Leffel, 76 Pa. 476, 479, 480; Williams v. Thrall, 101 Wis. 337, 76 N. W. 599; Rochevot v. Wolf, 96 App. Div. 506, 89 N. Y. Supp. 142; Long v. Chapman, 97 App. Div. 241, 89 N. Y. Supp. 841. The weight ......
-
Leitermann v. Barnard
...1, 97 N. W. 515;Widman v. Gay, 104 Wis. 277, 80 N. W. 450; Fuller & W. Co. v. Shurts et al., 95 Wis. 606, 70 N. W. 683;Williams v. Thrall, 101 Wis. 337, 76 N. W. 599;Manning v. School Dist., 124 Wis. 84, 102 N. W. 356;Houlahan v. Clark, 110 Wis. 43, 85 N. W. 676;Manthey v. Stock, 133 Wis. 1......
-
Manning v. Sch. Dist. No. 6 of Ft. Atkinson
...used. Manitowoc Steam B. Wks. v. Manitowoc G. Co.; Fuller-Warren Co. v. Shurts et al., 95 Wis. 606, 70 N. W. 683;Williams et al. v. Thrall et al., 101 Wis. 337, 76 N. W. 599;Sherry v. Madler, 101 N. W. 1095 (not yet officially reported). The evidence in this case certainly did not show, as ......
-
Tilton v. James L. Gates Land Co.
...v. Bryant, 73 Wis. 20, 40 N. W. 806,Manitowoc Steam Boiler Works v. Manitowoc Glue Co., 120 Wis. 1, 97 N. W. 515,Williams v. Thrall, 101 Wis. 337, 76 N. W. 599,Warehouse & Builders' Supply Co. v. Galvin, 96 Wis. 523, 71 N. W. 804, 65 Am. St. Rep. 57,Cohn v. Plumer, 88 Wis. 622, 60 N. W. 100......