Legal Opinion

Brownell Improvement Co. v. Critchfield

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided July 18, 1901PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Assumpsit, for the breach of a contract. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Edmund W. Burke, Judge, presiding.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Sears

It is contended by counsel for appellant that the work done by appellant was accepted by the appellees, and there-: fore no subsequent claim for defects in it can be successfully asserted by appellees.- To this contention we do not assent. There was no absolute and unconditional acceptance of the work by appellees. On the contrary, when the conditional, or, as it is called by the parties, “ temporary ” settlement was made the wording of the settlement very carefully guarded against any such absolute acceptance as wTould preclude a subsequent claim for defects. By the terms of that agreement…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Atkins v. MooreIllinois Supreme Court · 1876
  2. Waidner v. PaulyIllinois Supreme Court · 1892
  3. Harvey v. HamiltonAppellate Court of Illinois · 1894

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Harris v. Faultfinders, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1981
  2. Grove ex rel. Roy Hamm Post No. 101 American Legion v. Board of SupervisorsAppellate Court of Illinois · 1927
  3. North Avenue Building v. HuberAppellate Court of Illinois · 1914

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API