Arnold v. Bournique
Appellate Court of Illinois
1892.] APPEAL from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. THEODOnE BRENTANO, Judge,
1Opinion of the CourtGary, J.
This case has been here before ancl is reported, with the names reversed, in 33 Ill. App. 303. The law then declared binds us now. C. M. & St. Paul Ry. Co. v. Hoyt, 31 Ill. App. 64.
On the last trial the appellants offered to prove under a quantum meridt count, the value of their labor and material. The evidence was rejected. The appellants urge that Davidson v. Provost, 35 Ill. App. 126, is authority that it should have been received. The cases are not parallel. There certificates were to be given by two architects, one of whom had died, so that the authority had ceased. The work went • on,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Walker v. BrownIllinois Supreme Court · 1862
- McAuley v. CarterIllinois Supreme Court · 1859
- Stose v. HeisslerIllinois Supreme Court · 1887
- Zjednoczenie v. SadeckiAppellate Court of Illinois · 1891
- Bournique v. ArnoldAppellate Court of Illinois · 1889
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Heberlein v. WendtAppellate Court of Illinois · 1902
- Davis v. GibsonAppellate Court of Illinois · 1897