Thomas Hoist Co. v. William J. Newman Co.

6 N.E.2d 171, 365 Ill. 160
CourtIllinois Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 10, 1936
DocketNo. 23727. Appellate Court reversed; superior court affirmed.
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 6 N.E.2d 171 (Thomas Hoist Co. v. William J. Newman Co.) 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
Thomas Hoist Co. v. William J. Newman Co., 6 N.E.2d 171, 365 Ill. 160 (Ill. 1936).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Farthing

delivered the opinion of the court:

This cause is here on leave to appeal, granted to review a judgment of the Appellate Court for the First District reversing a decree rendered by the superior court of Cook county.

Appellant, the Thomas Hoist Company, filed a bill against appellees, the William J. Newman Company, the Ready Coal and Construction Company and Michael Ready, by which it sought to enforce a trust. By agreement the case was taken for decision by the chancellor on the pleadings and .exhibits without additional evidence. By the decree it was found that the contract involved in this litigation created a trust of the funds derived from the Sanitary. District of Chicago; that appellant is a cestui que trustent and is entitled to be paid from those funds; that appellees were guilty of a diversion of $2037.51 from the trust fund, which they are personally liable to re-pay to appellant, and that appellees had stated that they would continue thereafter to divert additional sums coming due to appellant from the trust fund, the total.of which future threatened diversions amounted to $4754.19. Appellees were ordered to pay $2037.51 and costs, and in addition they were restrained from diverting, using or disbursing any of the money which the chancellor found should be paid each month to appellant. Appellees were ordered to pay appellant $679.17 per month, beginning with the month of March and continuing thereafter until the full amount of appellant’s claim was paid. Each monthly installment represented ten per cent of appellant’s claim, and the money was ordered paid out of money received by appellees from the sanitary district.

The Sanitary District of Chicago on September 24, 1931, made a contract with one of the appellees, the William J. Newman Company, a corporation, (hereinafter called the Newman Company,) for the construction of a part of the West Side intercepting sewer. The Newman Company began work on the sewer and continued until February 5, 1932. It then ceased work because the sanitary district did not have the money to pay the current vouchers issued on the estimates of its chief engineer. Early in 1934 the Federal government agreed, on certain conditions, to advance funds to the sanitary district to complete the sewer, but the Newman Company was unable to meet the conditions imposed. The Newman Company entered into a contract with appellee the Ready Coal and Construction Company, a corporation, (hereinafter called the Ready Company,) under date of July 16, 1934, and this is the contract involved in this suit. By its terms the Newman Company sold, assigned and transferred its contract with the sanitary district to the Ready Company and also sold and assigned to it all the tools, plant and equipment on the site of the work and all moneys due and to beóome due the Newman Company for work then performed. This assignment included a $3200 hoist bought by the Newman Company from appellant and electrical wiring and equipment furnished the Newman Company on the job by the Thomas Elevator Operating Company. The electrical wiring claim amounted to $3591.66 and had been assigned to appellant. There is no dispute that the purchase price of the hoist and the claim for electrical wiring and equipment are correct and make up the total due appellant.

The Ready Company made a supplemental agreement with the sanitary district and proceeded to complete the sewer work covered by the Newman Company contract. The Ready Company received its first payment from the sanitary district on September 10, 1934. On December 2, 1932, April 1, August 1 and December 1, 1933, and on April 2, 1934, the Thomas Elevator Operating Company served a notice of claim for a sub-contractor’s lien on the sanitary district. June 28, 1934, a release of' this claim for lien was obtained through the efforts of William J. Newman, president of the Newman Company, during its negotiations with the Ready Company.

After reciting most of the facts stated, the contract of July 16, 1934, between the Newman and Ready Companies provides in the first section that “all moneys that may be now due and which shall hereafter become due under said contract and supplemental contract, shall, when and as paid, be deposited in a special account to be opened in such bank, in Chicago, Illinois, as Ready Co. shall designate. Nothing shall be drawn out of such account except on checks or orders signed by Michael Ready or by such person as he shall, in writing, designate.” The second section provides: “None of the money so deposited shall be used for any purpose other than to pay for labor, material or other items arising under and out of said contract and the other payments hereinafter set forth, except this, that after all the things called for by said contract shall have been completed and accepted by the sanitary district, and all labor, material and other items arising under and out of said contract shall have been fully paid, Ready Co. shall receive, have and hold to its own use forever, the sum of seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000) as full and complete compensation to it for its undertakings and obligations herein. The balance, if any, shall be paid to Newman Co. or such other person or persons, firms, corporations or associations as said Newman Co. or William J. Newman, may designate. In consideration whereof the parties hereto agree that said William J. Newman shall devote his time and attention to the supervision of the work called for by said contract with the sanitary district in like manner as if the said contract had not been assigned to Ready Co.”

Section 3, after reciting that the parties further understand that the Newman Company is indebted to other persons in the sum of $46,787.59 for bills incurred in connection with the contract, one of which is a claim for $24,394.38 due to W. A. Alexander & Co., provides that the Newman Company will obtain an agreement from Alexander & Co. to extend the time of payment to August 1, 1935. It is agreed that this particular claim shall be and remain a claim against the Newman Company and shall only be paid out of any moneys that may be on hand to the credit of the Newman Company after payment of everything mentioned in the preceding section.

Section 4 provides: “It is further understood and agreed that as to the balance of the claims against Newman Co. mentioned in paragraph 3 hereof, Newman Co. agrees to obtain an agreement that they and each of them will extend the due dates and maturity of their claims as follows, to-wit: That each and every of them will agree to accept ten per cent (10%) of their claims per month, the first payment to be made ninety (90) days after the first voucher is issued by the sanitary district, upon resumption of the work by Newman Co. and Ready Co. under said contract and supplemental contract with the sanitary district, and ten per cent (10%) of their claims monthly thereafter until paid in full in the amounts shown in said audit report, and Ready Co. agrees to sign the checks necessary to withdraw the funds to make such payments, with the understanding, however, that if, by reason of the payments so made, it shall occur that the amount which shall be paid by the sanitary district under said contract shall not, at the termination of said contract, aggregate a sufficient amount to re-pay said Ready Co., Newman Co. shall be liable for any deficiency. It being understood, however, that in no event shall Ready Co. become personally liable therefor, or for any part thereof.”

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

Related

Lulich v. Sherwin-Williams Co.
799 F. Supp. 64 (N.D. Illinois, 1992)
Hufford v. Balk
497 N.E.2d 742 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1986)
In Re Estate of Savage
392 N.E.2d 263 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1979)
Franklin Life Insurance v. Commonwealth Edison Co.
451 F. Supp. 602 (S.D. Illinois, 1978)
J. & R. Electric Co. v. Edward P. Allison Co.
260 N.E.2d 755 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1970)
Ryan Oil Co. v. Ewald
189 N.E.2d 404 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1963)
Northwest Racing Association v. Hunt
156 N.E.2d 285 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1959)
Olson v. Rossetter
71 N.E.2d 556 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1947)
Bundy v. Solon
51 N.E.2d 183 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1943)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
6 N.E.2d 171, 365 Ill. 160, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thomas-hoist-co-v-william-j-newman-co-ill-1936.