Case ID: ill-app_210/html/0319-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice O’Connor", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

William Downs, Appellant, v. Malinda Lambur, Appellee.
    Gen. No. 23,573.
    (Not to be reported in full.)
    Abstract of the Decision.
    1. Municipai, Court of Chicago, § 13
      
      —when statement of claim may be amended. Where an action to recover for services is brought on an implied contract and it develops that plaintiff’s claim is based upon an express contract, he may obtain leave to amend his statement of claim.
    2. Contracts—what is effect of adverse judgment in action based on theory of implied contract. Where one sues to recover for services on the theory of an implied contract and judgment is rendered against him, he cannot thereafter sue for such services on the theory of an express contract.
    Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. William N. Gem mill, Judge, presiding.
    Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1917.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 24, 1918.
    Statement of the Case.
    Action by William Downs, plaintiff, against Malinda Lambur, defendant, to recover for work and labor and material. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals.
    William S. Corbin, for appellant.
    Pollock, Rainey & Livingston, for appellee; Robert S. Cook, of counsel.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Justice O’Connor

delivered the opinion of the court.