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
Lost Student (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
Lost Student (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|court=Louisiana Court of Appeal | |court=Louisiana Court of Appeal | ||
|date=1955-11-29 | |date=1955-11-29 | ||
|subject= | |subject=Contracts | ||
|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 [https://www.websterparishla.org/index.html 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. |
Revision as of 01:43, July 8, 2023
Ever-Tite Roofing v. Green | |
Court | Louisiana Court of Appeal |
---|---|
Citation | |
Date decided | 1955-11-29 |
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
Issues
Arguments
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.
The Court sided with Ever-Tite at the end. Green was ordered to pay $311 in money damages.