Case ID: ill-app_191/html/0116-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Smith", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

James Holec and Frank Holec, trading as Holec Brothers, Plaintiffs in Error, v. Kate Beranek, Defendant in Error.
    Gen. No. 19,529.
    (Not to be reported in full.)
    Abstract of the Decision.
    Assumpsit, action op, § 93
      
      —when person entitled to recovery for labor performed. In an action for labor and material in erecting mason work for a building, held that recovery should have been allowed for extra work and for a portion of a balance due on the contract which was substantially performed, and a finding and judgment in favor of the defendant was contrary to the evidence.
    Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joseph E. Ryan, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1913.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Opinion filed January 5, 1915.
    Statement of the Case.
    Action by James Holec and Frank Holec, trading as Holec Brothers, against Kate Beranek to recover $486.87. The action was on a written contract wherein the plaintiffs, for $1,070, agreed to furnish labor and material and to erect mason work for a certain building, the plans being furnished by architects employed by the defendant. The plaintiff’s claim was for $300, being a balance due on the contract, and $190.03 for extra work. The case was tried before the court without a jury and the issues were found in favor of the defendant, whereupon the plaintiffs brought error.
    Charles J. Michal, for plaintiffs in error.
    F. J. Karasek, for defendant in error.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Justice Smith

delivered the opinion of the court.