Case ID: conn_72/html/0732-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

William J. Barnwell et al. vs. Catherine Keating.
    Third Judicial District.
    Argued June 9th
    decided June 20th, 1899.
    Action to recover a balance claimed to be du.e on a building contract, brought to the Court of Common Pleas in Fair-field County and tried to the court, Carrol, J.; facts found and judgment rendered for the defendant, and appeal by the plaintiffs for alleged errors in the rulings of the court.
    
      No error.
    
    
      Bacon Wakeman, for the appellants (plaintiffs).
    
      John C. Chamberlain, for the appellee (defendant).
   Per Curiam.

The complaint in this case was the “ common counts,” with a bill of particulars. The bill of particulars showed a claim of 1139.35 due from the defendant to the plaintiffs, for work done and materials furnished. The first defense was the general issue. Under that issue it was necessary for the plaintiffs to show by a fair preponderance of proof that they had performed work and furnished materials for the defendant of that value, for which they had not been paid, in order to entitle them to a judgment. They did not do this. On the contrary, as the finding shows, the work which they had performed was so negligently and imperfectly done", and the materials which they furnished were so inferior, that the plaintiffs were not entitled to anything over and beyond what they had received; and that the said sum of $139.35 was not justly due them. Judgment was rendered for the defendant.

The questions made by the plaintiffs on the matters set forth in the second defense are entirely immaterial. The judgment rests wholly on the first defense.

There is no error.