Jacob & Young's Inc. built a house for Kent. Kent's Country Residence was built in 1914 for $77,000, Kent started living in it in 1914 but did not complain about the plumbing until 1915 when he learned that his piping was stamped " Cohoes" instead of "Reading"  A subcontractor's oversight led to a failure to install pipe from "Reading Manufacture" as a contract requirement. Kent ordered Jacobs to replace it.  Jacobs refused on grounds that that it would mean demolishing the house. Kent did not make the final payment to Jacobs. Jacobs sued. The court refused to accept evidence that the installed pipe was the same quality as Reading pipe and entered a verdict for Kent. 

            The Court of Appeals of NY upheld the decision for Jacobs. "The courts never say that one who makes a contract fills the measure of his duty by less than full performance. They do say, however, that an omission, both trivial and innocent will sometimes be atoned for by the allowance of the resulting damage. As for adjusting the price, the measure of the allowance is not the cost of the replacement.., but the difference is value...."

1. The NY CT of Appeals found that Jacobs & Young's had substantially performed. To what, if any remedy was Kent entitled.
2. A requirement of substantial performance is good faith. Has J&Y substantially performed, why or why not?

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

According to the theory of substantial performance a party who has substantially completed a contract may collect the contract price less the damages ... View the full answer