Legal Opinion

Conklin v. Plant

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided December 16, 1889PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Will County; the Hon. Dorrance Dibell, Judge, presiding.

1Opinion of the CourtLacey, J.

This was an action in assumpsit brought by the appellees against the appellant to recover for the value of certain building material which they had furnished to one Horton, who was a contractor, with appellant, to build a house on his premises, which material was used in constructing the house, and which Horton had failed to pay for according to the contract between him and appellees.

This suit is brought under Sec. 35, Chap. 82, as amended by the Legislature 'in 1887; Session Laws 1887, page 221. This statute provides in substance that the original contractor, whenever any payment of money…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Birks v. HoustonIllinois Supreme Court · 1872
  2. Ruth v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1881

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Chicago Sash, Door & Blind Mfg. Co. v. ShawAppellate Court of Illinois · 1892
  2. Hughes v. RussellAppellate Court of Illinois · 1891
  3. Alliance Steel, Inc. v. PiercyAppellate Court of Illinois · 1996
  4. Alliance Steel, Inc. v. PiercyAppellate Court of Illinois · 1996
  5. Hintze v. WeissAppellate Court of Illinois · 1892

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

Powered by the Exa API