DocketNumber: No. 80
Citation Numbers: 123 Pa. 19
Judges: Clark, Gorlon, Greek, Hakd, Paxson, Steerett, Sterrett, Williams
Filed Date: 11/5/1888
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 2/17/2022
OPINION,
Plaintiff company neither proved nor offered to prove such facts as would have warranted the jury in finding substantial performance of the contract embodied in the written proposition submitted to and accepted by the defendants. In several particulars the work contracted for was not done according to the plain terms of the contract. Nearly one half of the well was not reamed out, as required, to an eight inch diameter so
The equitable doctrine of substantial performance is intended for the protection and relief of those who have faithfully and honestly endeavored to perform their contracts in all material and substantial particulars, so that their right to compensation may not be forfeited by reason of mere technical, inadvertent, or unimportant omissions or defects. It is incumbent on him who invokes its protection to present a case in which there has been no wilful omission or departure from the terms of his contract. If he fails to do so, the question of substantial performance should not be submitted to the jury.
The offers specified in the third, fourth and fifth assignments were rightly rejected. The proposed evidence was irrelevant and incompetent. There is nothing in the record that requires a reversal of the judgment.
Judgment affirmed.