McClay v. Gluck

Minnesota Supreme Court
McClay v. Gluck, 41 Minn. 193 (Minn. 1889)
42 N.W. 875; 1889 Minn. LEXIS 307
Gileillan

Can I rely on this case?

Yes — no negative treatment found

Based on 3 citing opinions

Analysis generated from citing opinions in this archive. Not legal advice.

McClay v. Gluck

Opinion of the Court

Gileillan, C. J.

Action to recover a balance claimed to be due upon a contract for tbe erection of a building, and for extra work on the building. • Plaintiff had a verdict. The evidence was sufficient to justify it. It can hardly be said that any question of law is presented. Parties may by parol modify a written executory contract under seal, either by changing its terms or waiving its conditions, if they have acted under and executed it as so modified. That the parties to this contract agreed on the waivers and modifications claimed by plaintiff, and acted under and executed it accordingly, were questions for the jury, and the evidence justifies their finding.

Judgment affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
J. H. McClay v. John G. Gluck
Cited By
5 cases
Status
Published