Cox

The judgment appealed from is against defendant McLaughlin alone. The contract on which the plaintiffs must rely—being that set forth in the answer of defendant McLaughlin—was held to he an “ entire contract ” in Cox v. W. P. R. R. Co. 44 Cal. 18 . Assuming that the failure to pay, as alleged, constituted a breach of the contract, the plaintiffs could have treated the specific contract as rescinded, and have brought suit on the *606 implied promise of defendant to pay the value of the work actually done.

That the present is not an action on the implied promise is apparent, not only from the omission of any averment of the actual value of the work done, but from the whole frame of the complaint.

Where an entire contract is terminated by the employer against the will of the contractor, the latter is not confined to the actual value of the work done, but may prosecute his action for the breach of the agreement, and may recover as damages the profits he would have made had he been allowed to complete the work. The contract is thus terminated where the employer prevents or prohibits the completion of the 'work—the contractor being ready and willing to complete the work. Such actions…