McGinley v. Hardy
Before: Cope
Synopsis
Plaintiff sues for balance due on a contract for erecting a building and a small sum for extra work. Defendant seeks to offset a claim for two and one-third months’ rent lost by him, because of the neglect of plaintiff to finish the building within the time specified in the contract, defendant having, at the date of the contract, leased the building to responsible tenants, the lease to take effect from the time named in the contract for its completion: Held, that defendant cannot offset his rents, because the circumstances show that the contract was modified by the parties as to the time for the completion of the building.
‘Cope, J. delivered the opinion of the Court. Field, C. J. concurring.
We have examined the record in this case, and find no error for which the judgment should be reversed. The alterations in the plan of the building constitute a sufficient answer to any claim on the part of the defendant growing out of a failure to complete the contract within the time specified. The circumstances show very clearly a modification of the contract in' this respect.
Judgment affirmed.
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)