Folliott v. Hunt

21 Ill. 654
CourtIllinois Supreme Court
DecidedApril 15, 1859
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 21 Ill. 654 (Folliott v. Hunt) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Illinois Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Folliott v. Hunt, 21 Ill. 654 (Ill. 1859).

Opinion

Caton, C. J.

The second instruction given for the plaintiff below was wrong. We have repeatedly decided that where work is done under a special contract^ the price of the work must be governed by the stipulations of the contract, although the party may be justified in abandoning the contract, and bringing his action for the quantum meruit of the work. If under the circumstances, the plaintiff has suffered damages by the breach of the contract, over and above the .price of the work fixed by it, he must recover for su'ch breach, but that cannot influence the price he shall recover for the work he has done.

The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.

Judgment reversed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Edward Thompson Co. v. Decker
200 Ill. App. 179 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1916)
Rice v. Partello
88 Ill. App. 52 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1900)
Demme & Dierkes Furniture Co. v. McCabe
49 Ill. App. 453 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1893)
City of Chicago v. Sexton
2 N.E. 263 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1885)
William Butcher Steel Works v. Atkinson
68 Ill. 421 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1873)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
21 Ill. 654, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/folliott-v-hunt-ill-1859.