Georgetown Tp. High School Dist. No. 218 v. Hardy

• Decision Date: 06 May 1976
• Docket Number: No. 12654,12654
• Court: United States Appellate Court of Illinois
• Parties: GEORGETOWN TOWNSHIP HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 218, Plaintiff- Appellant, v. Billie D. HARDY, Defendant-Appellee, and D. Clarence Wilson and C. James Wilson, d/b/a Wilson & Wilson, Architects, Defendants.

Page 88

349 N.E.2d 88

38 Ill.App.3d 722

GEORGETOWN TOWNSHIP HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 218, Plaintiff- Appellant, v. Billie D. HARDY, Defendant-Appellee, and D. Clarence Wilson and C. James Wilson, d/b/a Wilson &

Wilson, Architects, Defendants.

No. 12654.

Appellate Court of Illinois, Fourth District.

May 6, 1976.

Rehearing Denied July 1, 1976.

Clausen, Miller, Gorman, Caffrey & Wiltous, Chicago, for plaintiff-appellant; James T. Ferrini, William J. Sneckenberg, Gary Kostow, Chicago, of counsel.

Gunn, Hickman, Kesler, Jenkins & Vogel, Ltd., Danville, for defendant-appellee; Robert Z. Hickman, Danville, of counsel.

SIMKINS, Justice:

The sole question in this appeal is whether the trial court erred in dismissing plaintiff's second amended complaint against this defendant for failure to state a cause of action.

Plaintiff filed a three count complaint to recover damages for injury to its real and personal property from defendant Billie Hardy, a general contractor and D. Clarence Wilson and C. James Wilson, architects. All three counts contain these general allegations: 1) Plaintiff was the owner of the Georgetown Township High School building; 2) Defendant Billie Hardy was a general contractor who performed work on an addition and remodeling of the high school; 3) Defendants Wilson were architects and had drawn the plans and specifications for the addition and remodeling; 4) The work was completed prior to December 8, 1966; 5) On December 8, 1966, the new addition collapsed and plaintiff suffered damages in the amount of.$72,444.80, the cost of the required repairs.

Count I was solely against defendant Hardy and was based on breach of express warranty.

Attached to the Complaint, and incorporated into Counts I and II by reference, was the contract between plaintiff and defendant Hardy. In essence it provided that defendant agreed to construct the building in (1) 'strict accordance' with the plans and specifications prepared by the architects, and (2) to do so in a workmanlike manner. These were the duties imposed upon Hardy by the contract, and they were the Only duties imposed. It is the rule in Illinois that a contractor is not liable for damages if he (1) performs his work in accordance with the plans and specifications furnished by the owner, and (2) does so in a workmanlike manner. (Robert G. Regan Co. v. Ficchi, 44 Ill.App.2d 336, 194 N.E.2d 665; Conway Co. v. City of Chicago, 274 Ill. 369, 113 N.E. 703.) Breach of Either of these two duties can give rise to a cause of action. (Endurance Paving Co. v. Pappas, 117 Ill.App.2d 81, 253 N.E.2d 895.) It is also clear that a contractor has no right to deviate from plans and specifications made a part of a contract.

'Contractors have no right to depart from working plans made a part of the contract. If they do so, it is at their peril, and they become guarantors as to the strength and safety of the structures. The parties were clearly entitled to contract to have the buildings erected in accordance with certain plans and specifications. An express contract admits of no departure from its terms, and the subcontractors could discharge themselves from liability only by constructing the buildings in accordance with the plans and specifications, unless a deviation was mutually agreed upon. Clark et al. v. Pope et al., 70 Ill. 128, 142.'

(Robert G. Regan Co. v. Fiocchi, 44 Ill.App.2d 336, 340, 194 N.E.2d 665, 668.)

Paragraph 7 of Count I of the Complaint alleged that:

'7. Defendant HARDY breached the aforesaid expressed warranty and agreement by erecting and constructing the addition to the GEORGETOWN TOWNSHIP HIGH SCHOOL building in an unworkmanlike manner and not in conformity with the plans and specifications prepared by defendant WILSON in the following manner:

a) The addition to the GEORGETOWN TOWNSHIP HIGH SCHOOL building could not withstand horizontal wind pressures of 15 lbs. per square foot;

b) The roof could not withstand pressures acting outward from the normal to the roof surface equal to 1.25 15 lbs. per square foot;

c) The roof anchorage did not consist of steel or iron bolts to resist the vertical uplift or the roof;

d) The roof anchorage provided for on the roof trusses was not of sufficient...