Britton v. Turner

6 N.H. 481 (1834).

Facts

Britton (P) agreed to perform labor for Turner (D) for one year, to begin March 1831. P was to be paid $120 for the work. P started the work but discontinued in December 1831 after nine and a half months and without the consent of D. P sued to recover in quantum meruit the value of his services from March through December. Evidence was offered to show that P left D’s service. D argued that under the general principle that where the contract is entire, as where A agrees to do a certain thing, for which B is to make a certain compensation, the doing of the thing by A is a condition precedent, and he has no remedy until he has fully performed his part. The trial court instructed the jury that if they accepted the facts as alleged, P was entitled to a reasonable compensation for the work performed. The jury awarded P $95. D appealed.