Find Laws Find Lawyers Free Legal Forms USA State Laws
Laws-info.com » Cases » Illinois » 2nd District Appellate » 2006 » MD Electrical Eontractors, Inc. v. Abrams
MD Electrical Eontractors, Inc. v. Abrams
State: Illinois
Court: 2nd District Appellate
Docket No: 2-06-0135 Rel
Case Date: 11/27/2006
Preview:No. 2--06--0135 filed: 11/27/06 ______________________________________________________________________________ IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS SECOND DISTRICT ______________________________________________________________________________ MD ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS, INC., ) Appeal from the Circuit Court ) of Du Page County. ) Plaintiff-Appellant, ) ) v. ) No. 05--AR--1433 ) FRED ABRAMS and CAROL ABRAMS, ) Honorable ) Kenneth A. Abraham, Defendants-Appellees. ) Judge, Presiding. ______________________________________________________________________________ JUSTICE HUTCHINSON delivered the opinion of the court: Plaintiff, MD Electrical Contractors, Inc., sued defendants, Fred and Carol Abrams, in quantum meruit to recover for improvements that it made as a subcontractor on a home improvement project. Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint (see 735 ILCS 5/2--619(a)(9) (West 2004)), contending that, because plaintiff had violated the Home Repair and Remodeling Act (Act) (815 ILCS 513/1 et seq. (West 2004)), it could not recover. The trial court granted the motion. On appeal, plaintiff contends that (1) the Act does not apply to plaintiff as a subcontractor, and (2) even if the Act does apply, it does not preclude plaintiff from recovering in quantum meruit. We agree with plaintiff's first contention, and we reverse and remand. Plaintiff's first amended complaint alleged that, between about June 6, 2004, and October 1, 2004, plaintiff furnished subcontracting services, including electrical equipment and labor, toward the remodeling of defendants' house; that there was no contract between plaintiff and defendants;

No. 2--06--0135 and that plaintiff was entitled to $14,984 for the services and materials that it provided. Defendants moved to dismiss the first amended complaint, alleging that plaintiff had violated the Act and thus could recover nothing. Defendants relied on the following sections of the Act: "
Download MD Electrical Eontractors, Inc. v. Abrams.pdf

Illinois Law

Illinois State Laws
Illinois Tax
Illinois Court
Illinois Labor Laws
    > Minimum Wage in Illinois
Illinois Agencies
    > Illinois DMV

Comments

Tips