Case ID: ill-app_187/html/0413-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Graves", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

J. J. Cahill, Appellee, v. George B. Dryden, Appellant.
    Gen. No. 18,892.
    (Hot to he reported in full.)
    Abstract of the Decision.
    1. Appeal and error, § 1325
      
      —when presumed that trial court correctly construed and applied the law. Where on the trial of a case without a jury no propositions of law or findings of fact were presented to the court to be passed on, it will he presumed that the court correctly construed and applied the law.
    2. Building and construction contracts, § 103*—when finding that heat regulator worked properly sustained by the evidence. In an action to recover a balance claimed to he due for the installation of a heating plant in defendant’s building by plaintiff, where the defense was that a regulator connected with the plant failed to properly regulate the heat, held that a finding for plaintiff was sustained by the evidence.
    Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. H. Sterling Pomeroy, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1912.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed June 24, 1914.
    Statement of the Case.
    Action by J. J. Cahill against George B. Dryden to recover a balance claimed to be due the plaintiff for installing a heating plant in defendant’s building. The suit was originally brought before a justice of the peace where plaintiff had judgment for $80.01, and on appeal to the Circuit Court plaintiff recovered a like judgment and the costs in both courts. To reverse the judgment, defendant appeals.
    Octigan, Zahn & Anderson, for appellant.
    Otto G. Ryden, for appellee.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Yols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Justice Graves

delivered the opinion of the court.