Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

61 Ill. App. 335

Dickinson v. Prince

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided December 12, 1895

Appellate Court of Illinois · decided 1895-12-12

<p>1. Extras—Burden of Proof as to.—Where a contractor makes a demand for extras, the burden of proof is upon him to show that the work in question was extra.</p>

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently February 1971

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Remittitur ordered, etc · Decided 1895-12-12

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Mr. Presiding Justice Gary

¶1delivered the opinion ok the Court.

¶2The parties made a contract whereby the appellee undertook to do a job of carpenter work upon the house of the appellant for $1,200. The appellant had paid $1,550 and ivas entitled to further credit of $45.60. The appellee sued for $496.83 more, of which $265 was for some minor contracts. The appellant having paid $85 more than the contracts called for,The demand of the appellee was wholly for extras.

¶3The court found for him $466.83. His demand being, in fact, for extras, the burden of proof was upon him. We can not recapitulate the evidence, without occupying too much space and taking too much time, but having studied it Ave are convinced that the appellant is charged by the finding with much more than he should be.

¶4As the appellant has at one time offered to pay $332, if the appellee Avill remit all in excess of that sum, the judgment to that extent will be affirmed; otherwise reversed; in either case at the cost of the appellee.

/61/illapp/335 · .json · Public domain