Case ID: ill-app_204/html/0430-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

City Engineering Construction Company, Appellant, v. Frank Loeffler and William E. McCarthy, Appellees.
    Gen. No. 22,750.
    (Not to be reported in full.)
    Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. P. C. Walters, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1916.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed March 26, 1917.
    Statement of the Case.
    Action by City Engineering Construction Company, a corporation, plaintiff, against Frank Loeffler and William E. McCarthy, defendants, to recover damages for alleged breach of a building contract. From a judgment for defendants, plaintiff appeals.
    Walter H. Eckert, for appellant.
    F. F. Tollkuehn, for appellees.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.

Abstract of the Decision.

1. Building and construction contracts, § 85 —what is bar to recovery by contractor. Where the plaintiff by contract agreed to erect for the defendants certain buildings and to procure building loans therefor, held that his failure to procure such loans would be a bar to his recovery for a breach of the contract by the defendants.

2. Building and construction contracts, § 103*—when evidence is sufficient to show failure of contractor to procure loans. In an action by a contractor to recover for alleged breach of a building contract, evidence held sufficient to sustain the finding that plaintiff had failed to prove its readiness and ability to procure certain loans which it had contracted with defendants to procure.