Ever-Tite Roofing Corporation v. Green

Facts

On June 10, 1953, the Greens signed a written proposal for Ever-Tite Roofing Corporation to re-roof their home in Webster Parish, Louisiana. It set out the work and a price payable in monthly installments. Ever-Tite's sales representative also signed, but he had no authority to accept the contract for the company. The paper said it would become binding only on written acceptance by the principal or an authorized officer of the contractor, or upon commencing performance of the work. It set no time limit for acceptance or for starting the work. Because the job was on credit, Ever-Tite needed a credit report and approval from a lending institution, and the Greens knew their credit would be checked. Ever-Tite received the proposal the next day, requested a credit report, sent it to the lender, supplied the added information the lender asked for, and got approval. On June 18 or 19, 1953, the day after approval, it loaded two trucks with materials and sent workmen from Shreveport to the house. They found others already doing the work. The Greens told them the job had been given to other parties two days earlier and forbade them to work. The Greens had never told Ever-Tite they wanted out. Ever-Tite spent $85.37 on loading, hauling, unloading and wages, and its manager testified the expected profit was $226.

Issues

1. When a written offer sets no time limit for acceptance and allows acceptance by starting the work, must the offerors allow the contractor a reasonable time to accept, including an understood delay for financing, before they may withdraw?
2. Did Ever-Tite accept the offer by loading and hauling materials and workmen to the house before the Greens gave any notice that they dissented?
3. Can Ever-Tite recover attorney's fees in this suit for damages for breach of the contract?

Holding

Ever-Tite accepted within a reasonable time by starting performance, loading and hauling materials and workmen to the house, before the Greens gave any notice. A completed contract existed, and the Greens breached it. They owe damages but not attorney's fees.