Legal Opinion

Herlihy Mid-Continent Co. v. Sanitary District

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided March 21, 1945No. 28116, No. 28117. Reversed, with judgment here; Judgment affirmedPublishedCited by 33 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Murphy

On September 10, 1931, Herlihy Mid-Continent Company, referred to herein as plaintiff, entered into a contract with the Sanitary District of Chicago, designated herein as defendant, under the terms of which, plaintiff was to construct division D of the Calumet sewage works extension. The contract provided that defendant’s chief engineer should furnish monthly estimates of the amount completed, and that per cent of such estimates should be paid monthly, the balance to be retained by defendant until the project was completed. Defendant did not furnish such progress estimates and plaintiff…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Charles I. Hosmer, Inc. v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939
  2. Decatur Lumber & Manufacturing Co. v. CrailIllinois Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Underground Construction Co. v. Sanitary DistrictIllinois Supreme Court · 1937
  4. Chicago Daily News, Inc. v. KohlerIllinois Supreme Court · 1935
  5. Domeyer v. O'ConnellIllinois Supreme Court · 1936

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by33 opinions

  1. Chicago College of Osteopathic Medicine v. George A. Fuller Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1983
  2. Bates & Rogers Construction Corp. v. Greeley & HansenIllinois Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Coney v. Rockford Life InsuranceAppellate Court of Illinois · 1966
  4. Hensler v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  5. Donahue v. Rockford Showcase & Fixture Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1967

28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API