Havens

Havens v. Donahue

Good Law
111 Cal. 297·1896 Cal. LEXIS 578·43 P. 962
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 21, 1896S. F. No. 16California1,114 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Garoutte, J.

This is an action to recover for the-services of an architect. Judgment went for plaintiff, and defendant appeals from the judgment, and also from an order denying her motion for a new trial. Plaintiff’s contract was to furnish all necessary general drawings, specifications, and details for the construction of a building upon a commission of two and one-half per cent-upon the total cost. He was paid three thousand seven hundred and fifty dollars under the contract, and seeks to recover the balance.

Defendant’s first claim is that under such contract plaintiff was only entitled to recover his commissions-upon the cost of construction as far as the building had proceeded at the time his employment was terminated-This contention cannot be sustained. Plaintiff had. nothing to do with the construction of the building. His contract was simply to furnish the plans, drawings, and specifications, and this he did. The actual construction and cost of construction are only material to him *299 as fixing the amount of defendant’s liability for the services rendered. Again, the complaint also charged upon a quantum meruit, and the court found the value of plaintiff’s services at the amount…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.