Schulze v. Gottschalk
Appellate Court of Illinois
Assumpsit. Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Judson F. Going, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1908.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Baker
In an action of the fourth class in the Municipal Court, tried without a jury, plaintiff had judgment for $45, to reverse which defendant prosecutes this writ of error. The statement of plaintiff’s claim in the bill of particulars is as follows:
“Plaintiff’s claim is for work performed for and material furnished to defendant by plaintiff; painting and paperhanging in premises known as No. 560 Armitage avenue, Chicago; amount due as per contract, $48.75, and for extras furnished at request of defendant, $6.61.”
_ Plaintiff in error contends that the “bill of particulars of plaintiff’s claim” in…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Greenblodt v. Chicago Railways Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1914
- Basso v. Chicago City Railway Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1913