Wong v. Paisner

436 N.E.2d 990 (1982)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

A jury returned a verdict in favor of P in his action to recover $4,400 which he claimed was owed under a contract with D. The jury could have found that P agreed to prepare certain mechanical drawings for the defendant for a lump sum payment of $ 1,000. P claimed there was a modification of the agreement substituting an hourly rate for a lump sum payment. D denied any such modification but testified that he agreed to an additional lump sum payment of $500. P sent a defendant a bill for $5,400, representing 235 hours of work at $25 per hour, less the $500 that had already been paid. D testified that before he received the bill, he sent a cover letter and a check for $1,000 bearing the notation 'payment in full for services rendered.' The letter stated the D's position that their 'original deal was for one-time work.' The letter reiterated that the D's check for $ 1,000 represented payment in full and that D had tendered an additional $500 in an attempt to 'appease' P in light of their 'misunderstanding' over the terms of the contract. P deleted the 'payment in full' from the check and deposited it in his account. At trial D requested an instruction on accord and satisfaction, the judge refused. D appealed.