Jacob & Youngs, Inc. v. Kent

Facts

Jacob & Youngs built a country residence for Kent at a cost of upwards of $77,000 and sued to recover an unpaid balance of $3,483.46. Construction ended in June, 1914, and Kent then occupied the dwelling. No one complained of defective performance until March, 1915. One plumbing specification required all wrought iron pipe to be galvanized, lap welded pipe of the grade known as standard pipe of Reading manufacture. In March, 1915, Kent learned that some of the pipe was the product of other factories instead. The architect directed the builder to do the work anew. By then the plumbing was encased within the walls except in a few places where it had to be exposed, so obeying the order meant demolishing substantial parts of the completed structure at great expense. The builder left the work untouched and asked for the certificate showing the final payment was due. The evidence supported a finding that the omission of the prescribed brand was neither fraudulent nor willful; it resulted from the oversight and inattention of the builder's subcontractor. Reading pipe differed from other brands only by the manufacturer's name stamped on it at intervals of between six and seven feet. Even Kent's architect, who inspected the pipe on arrival, failed to notice the discrepancy.

Issues

1. Does a contractor's innocent and trivial omission of a specified brand of pipe defeat its right to the contract balance, or may the omission be remedied by an allowance of damages?
2. Where the cost of correcting the defect is grossly disproportionate to the good to be attained, is the owner limited to the difference in value rather than the cost of replacement?

Holding

The excluded evidence, if admitted, would have supplied some basis for inferring that the innocent omission of Reading pipe was insignificant in relation to the project, and such an omission need not be a breach of condition causing forfeiture. In these circumstances the measure of the allowance is not the cost of replacement but the difference in value, which would be either nominal or nothing.