This site is a developmental version of Wiki Law School. To go to the production site: www.wikilawschool.org
Ever-Tite Roofing v. Green: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
(Created page with "{{Infobox Case Brief |court=Louisiana Court of Appeal |date=November 29, 1955 |subject=Contracts/Outline |case_treatment=No |facts=Ever-Tite Roofing Corp. ("Ever-Tite") & Mr G...") |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
|subject=Contracts/Outline | |subject=Contracts/Outline | ||
|case_treatment=No | |case_treatment=No | ||
|facts=Ever-Tite Roofing Corp. ("Ever-Tite") & Mr Green ("Green") discussed replacing the roof on Green's residence in Webster Parish, Louisiana. | |facts=Ever-Tite Roofing Corp. ("Ever-Tite") & Mr Green ("Green") discussed replacing the roof on Green's residence in [https://www.websterparishla.org/index.html Webster Parish], Louisiana. | ||
On June 10th 1953, Green signed a document specifying the roofing work. The Ever-Tite sales representative wasn't authorize to accept the contract on behalf of Ever-Tite. | On June 10th 1953, Green signed a document specifying the roofing work. The Ever-Tite sales representative wasn't authorize to accept the contract on behalf of Ever-Tite. | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
Green refused to allow Ever-Tite employee to work on his roof. | Green refused to allow Ever-Tite employee to work on his roof. | ||
|procedural_history=Ever-Tite filed a lawsuit against Green for breach of contract. Ever-Tite lost in the trial court. | |procedural_history=Ever-Tite filed a lawsuit against Green for breach of contract. Ever-Tite lost in the trial court. | ||
|issues=Does beginning '''performance''' constitute '''acceptance''' for a contract that permits acceptance of the offer via performance? | |||
|holding=Yes. Initiating performance qualifies as acceptance. | |||
However, Green had notified Ever-Tite about withdrawal of the contract before the other roofing company commenced work & Ever-Tite arrived at Green's residence. | |||
|reasons=Ever-Tite's attempted performance operated as acceptance of the contract. Green signed the document. Subsequently, Ever-Tite could indicate acceptance by (1) an authorized signature or (2) performance. | |||
|comments=Ever-Tite only received notice of Green's withdrawal upon arriving at Green's home after having shipped roofing materials for 40 miles. So, the judges had different opinion's as to when Ever-Tite's roofing performance actually began. | |||
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | |case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | ||
|link=https://casetext.com/case/ever-tite-roofing-corporation-v-green | |link=https://casetext.com/case/ever-tite-roofing-corporation-v-green | ||
Revision as of 12:09, June 17, 2023
| Ever-Tite Roofing v. Green | |
| Court | Louisiana Court of Appeal |
|---|---|
| Citation | |
| Date decided | November 29, 1955 |
Facts
Ever-Tite Roofing Corp. ("Ever-Tite") & Mr Green ("Green") discussed replacing the roof on Green's residence in Webster Parish, Louisiana.
On June 10th 1953, Green signed a document specifying the roofing work. The Ever-Tite sales representative wasn't authorize to accept the contract on behalf of Ever-Tite.
Ever-Tite arranged financing for Green's roofing work since Green wasn't paying up-front.
A week later, Ever-Tite crew drove from Shreveport, Louisiana to Green's residence whereupon Ever-Tite discovered another roofing company in the midst of completing the roofing work.
Green refused to allow Ever-Tite employee to work on his roof.Procedural History
Ever-Tite filed a lawsuit against Green for breach of contract. Ever-Tite lost in the trial court.
Issues
Does beginning performance constitute acceptance for a contract that permits acceptance of the offer via performance?
Holding
Yes. Initiating performance qualifies as acceptance.
However, Green had notified Ever-Tite about withdrawal of the contract before the other roofing company commenced work & Ever-Tite arrived at Green's residence.Reasons
Ever-Tite's attempted performance operated as acceptance of the contract. Green signed the document. Subsequently, Ever-Tite could indicate acceptance by (1) an authorized signature or (2) performance.
Comments
Ever-Tite only received notice of Green's withdrawal upon arriving at Green's home after having shipped roofing materials for 40 miles. So, the judges had different opinion's as to when Ever-Tite's roofing performance actually began.
