4 LA 101 - Andrews v. Jacobs

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently February 1931

1 district · 2 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

¶1The facts are stated in the opinion of the court, delivered red by

Porter, J.

¶2The petitioners state that they built for and delivered to the defendant a house, and that their work and labour were *102worth five hundred and forty-six dollars and sixty-nine cents, of which sum they have only received one hundred and thirty-five dollars, leaving a balance still due them of four hundred and eleven dollars and sixty-nine cents.

Where a change is made in the construction of a building, if the materials be furnished by the owner the change will be presumed to have been made with his consent.Maybin, for appellant. Preston, for appellees.

¶3The answer denies that the defendant ever entered into any engagement whatever with Foult. It admits a contract with Andrews, but alleges it was for a specific sum, viz. two hundred dollars.

¶4The court of the first instance, by its judgement, sustained the allegations of the plaintiffs, and the defendant appealed.

¶5From the evidence before us we cannot say it erred. It is proved indeed the plaintiffs agreed to build a house for two hundred dollars; but it is also proved the house really built was of larger dimensions and of better construction. As the materials were furnished by the defendant, the judge below justly inferred the change was made by his consent, and the increased value was in our opinion correctly based on the evidence offered. L. C. 2735.

¶6It is, therefore, ordered, adjudged, and decreed, that the judgement of the District Court be affirmed, with costs.