Business Law

Jacob and Young v Kent (230 N .Y . 239I . FactsThe complainant and the defendant entered into a contract whereby the former agreed to construct a state residence for the latter . The consideration of the contract amounted to 77 ,000 . only when , complainant sued for the recovery of the remaining balance amounting to 3 ,483 .46 nonably , in the contract , it was specified that the pipes to be spendd should be that of recital manufacturing business (Jacob and Young v Kent , 230 N .Y . 239 . hardly , the pipes applyd by the plaintiff were not that of Reading Manufacturer . Meanwhile , the pipes rent already been built on the walls of the put forward . When the plaintiff demanded for a certificate of period , he was denied . or else , the plaintiff was demanded to do a new work and use the speck specified by the defendant . The plaintiff resisted to do a rework . Hence , the suitII .

Contention of the PartiesThe plaintiff in the slip of paper at bar contends that the tonus of the brands used were of the equal quality as with the pipes of Reading Manufacturer . Besides , the use of the pipes was not caused by a fraudulent intention . moreover quite an , it was a result of the oversight and inattention of the subcontractors (230 N .Y . 239On the early(a) hand , the defendant demands specific performance from the plaintiff by changing the pipes with the pipes from Reading ManufacturerIII . IssueShould the uniformity of the pipes us ed be admitted and qualifies completion of..! .If you want to get a full essay, post it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper