East Saginaw courier. (East Saginaw, Mich.) 1859-18??, 1865-11-29

readers, We comply cheertully with
request to publish the opinion of the
Court from certified copy under seal
of the Clerk:
In THE SUPREME CouRT-Harpey ID.
BwreA o.. The No.O York S' Saginaw
Solar SAT- Company.
The Plaintiff seeks TO recoverin this
suit the damages which he has sus-
tanned by not being allowed to fulfill
a contract made with the defendants,
under which he was to construct for
them twenty-six hundred salt vats
and covers on their premises upon
Saginaw River. The case comes be-
fore us for review upon the facts,
and the only question of law involved
in the case is whether the evidence
given by the Plaintiff to show DANA
ges was properly admitted.
BY the contract the Defendants
were to furnish and deliver on their
dock the materials for said watts and
covers as fast as the same should be
required by said Burrell, who was to
construct at least four hundred watts
and covers each month from the time
OF commencing the work. The lum-
Der was to be delivered in assorted
piles, and the complaint made by the
Plaintiff is, that in consequence Of the
lumber not being assorted, as it should
have been, the labor of loading the
same for carriage from the dock to the
place where it would be used was
greatly increased, and that delays oc-
CURED in the delivery of the lumber
which essentially hindered perfor-
nance by the Plaintiff, until he final
ly, at the request of Defendants, aban-
doned the contract altogether. The
declaration contains but one SPECIAL
count, which sets out the contract and
AYERS in general terms that the parties
entered upon performance, that the
Plaintiff was always ready and willing
to complete and fulfill it on his part,
but that the Defendants hindered, de-
layed, and prevented his SO doing, by
neglecting to furnish materials, so
that he only partly executed the same,
whereby he is greatly injured, and
damaged, &c. On the trial the De-
PENDANTS objected to all evidence ten
ding to show special damage, because
no special damage was sufficiently al
legged; and all the evidence was taken
subject to the objection.
Under this general allegation OF
damage, the Plaintiff would be emit
tied to recover thereon damages only |
which the law presumes to have ac-
crued from the wrong complained of.
I Chip. p. 42S; Deforest Us. Leete, rs
Johns. 122. The wrong complained of
is the failure by the Defendants to
deliver materials, by reason of which
the Plaintiff was hindered and delayed
in the performance, and finally COM
PEELED to abandon the contract. The
Circuit Judge allowed the Plaintiff to
recover the profits he would have
made had he been suffered to COM
plete the work, and the witnesses in
making their estimates were permitted
to take into the account the peculiarly
favorable season for work of the des-
cription to be done. The Plaintiff
was thus allowed to recover the diff
ference between the contract price,
and the sum which it would have cost
him to complete the contract at the
time agreed after deducting the pay
ments received.
The damages which the law seeks
to award to the party wronged, are
such as will compensate him for the
injury sustained. ANiSoa rs. Chandler,
III Mich. 542. When the party is to
perform labor from which profit is
to spring, as the direct result of work
done at contract price, and he is
prevented from earning this profit by
the wrongful act of the other party,
the loss of this profit is a direct and
natural result which the law will pre-
sumo to follow the breach of the con-
tract; and he is entitled to recover it
without special allegations in his dec
1aration. The consideration of profits
cannot be separated from the circum-
stances under which the work was to
HE done; and the Plaintiff was entitled
to show whatever was peculiarly favor
able, and which tended to diminish
The cost Of completing the contract
Every party in entering into a contract,
the profits of which depend upon con-
takes upon himself the risk
of their proving favorable; and it
could not permitted that one party,
after the other had assumed the risk
and found the contingencies to result
lin his favor, should have the option to
terminate the contract and procure the
work to be completed at his rates,
without fully compensating the other
for the profits which he is wrongfully
prevented from earning. The rule of
damages adopted was substantially
correct, and it only remains to be seen
whether the computation made by the
Circuit Judge is satisfactory to us on
n reyeiw of all the facts.
IVeriOus estimates were made by the
witnesses Of the proportionate amount
of the work done, the cost thus far,
the cost 10 complete. the remainder,
ste cost Of vat and cover by items,
and the actual cost of other Jobs of
the same description performed in the
neighborhood. How unsatisfactory
these estimates are will be seen when
it is found that careful computation
by them makes the Plaintiffs damages
vary from $S,606.82 by one estimate,
to SS0.07 by another. The first of
IL 4 I I Al n
tiff's profits nearly one hundred per
cent, and the second little over five
per cent; and there is no mean be-
tween the two, which the evidence
convinccs us can be accepted as an
accurate estimate. Whatever conclu-
ainn We may arriva at rnust tLa.oe..a |