Shepard v. Mills
Appellate Court of Illinois
Assumpsit, for work and material used in constructing a heating apparatus. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Philip Stein, Judge, presiding.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Waterman
This was an action of assumpsit brought to recover an amount claimed to be due for putting a heating apparatus in the premises of appellant. There was a finding and judgment for the plaintiff.
Where, under a special contract, nothing remains to be done but to pay what is due under the agreement, a recovery can be had under the common counts. Mayer v. Mitchell, 59 Ill. App. 26; Gottschalk v. Smith, 54 Ill. App. 341; 1 Chitty’s Pl. 350, note f.
Whether the contract under consideration had been performed by appellees, as well as whether title to the apparatus had passed, were questions which, so…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Glacius v. . BlackNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
- Keeler v. HerrIllinois Supreme Court · 1895
- Linch v. Paris Lumber and Grain Elevator Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1891
- Leeds v. LittleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
- Flaherty v. . MinerNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Watson Lumber Co. v. MouserAppellate Court of Illinois · 1975
- Stellwagen v. SchmidtAppellate Court of Illinois · 1924
- Nebraska Plumbing Supply Co. v. PayneNebraska Supreme Court · 1909
- Zapel v. EnnisAppellate Court of Illinois · 1902
- Foster v. McKeownAppellate Court of Illinois · 1899
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.