Mohr v. Swoop
Citations
- 13 Tiess. 94
Syllabus
<p>Syllabus.</p> <p>An architect who has performed part of his contract and is prevented from completing.it by the act of the other party, is entitled to compensation for the work actually done.</p> <p>Courts are not bound by any schedule of compensation it may have pleased the American Institute of Architects to adopt, especially when the plaintiff architect is not a member of the Institute and the owner is not shown to have any knowledge of its rates.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that because the court was vacating and remanding the matter on another ground, there was no reason to address other objections to the contested rule
- noting that “[t]he expertise of the agency . . . must be brought to bear” (citation omitted)
- declining to “render a final decision on petitioners’ other objections to the rule” when one objection was dispositive “and especially because the agency’s handling of the other factors may be different after reconsideration”
- “[R]egulation would be at an end if uncertainty alone were an excuse to ignore a congressional command to ‘deal with’ a 4 particular regulatory issue.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Claiborne, Honor
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.