Although the parties entered into an oral agreement for the construction of defendant restaurant, the scope of work that had been agreed upon changed significantly during the course of construction. No basis exists to disturb the trial court's finding, strongly supported by defendant's judicial and extrajudicial admissions, that the parties, in recognition of such changes, reached an understanding that a new price term should be set, but were unable to reach agreement. In...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
