Case ID: ny-st-rep_16/html/1017-05.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

Filed May 14. 1888.
    JAMES J. JONES, App’lt, v. THE MAYOR, etc., Resp’t.
    Contract—Additional compensation.
    
      Alex. Thain, for app’lt; H. R. Beekman, for resp’t.
   Per Curiam.

We think that the judge would have been warranted in dismissing the complaint.

First On the ground that there was no.certificate; and

Second, That the work additional compensation was claimed for, there was evidence that it was included in the original contract.

He did better for the plaintiff than he deserved; he submitted the case to the jury, and we shall not disturb it under this state of facts. ,

We think he received a more favorable consideration than he was entitled to, upon the evidence.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed.