Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut
142 A. 683 (1928)
In September 1926, the plaintiff agreed to excavate land in front of the defendant’s property and construct a concrete sidewalk and curb. The plaintiff was to begin work within a week and complete the project before the cold weather arrived. The plaintiff did not begin work until December 4, 1926, at which time he removed a strip of land in front of the defendant’s property. The plaintiff never constructed any part of the sidewalk or curb. On March 2, 1927, the defendant canceled the contract. The plaintiff brought suit to recover the reasonable value of the work he had performed. The trial court found the plaintiff was entitled to recover $133.68 for the reasonable value of the work performed. The defendant appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Banks, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 199,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.