{
  "id": 3643065,
  "name": "J. M. KREJCI COMPANY, INC., Plaintiff, v. SAINT FRANCIS HOSPITAL OF EVANSTON et al., Defendants (Mittelbusher & Tourtelot et al., Third-Party Plaintiffs-Appellants; St. Francis Hospital of Evanston, Third-Party Defendant-Appellant)",
  "name_abbreviation": "J. M. Krejci Co. v. Saint Francis Hospital",
  "decision_date": "1986-10-10",
  "docket_number": "No. 85\u20142691",
  "first_page": "396",
  "last_page": "399",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "148 Ill. App. 3d 396"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "250 N.E.2d 656",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "43 Ill. 2d 54",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        2844622
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/43/0054-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "402 N.E.2d 599",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "79 Ill. 2d 282",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        3070566
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/79/0282-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "495 N.E.2d 496",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "113 Ill. 2d 26",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        3173026
      ],
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "34-35"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/113/0026-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "456 N.E.2d 635",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "119 Ill. App. 3d 376",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        3628414
      ],
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "379-80"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/119/0376-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "435 N.E.2d 443",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "weight": 2,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "91 Ill. 2d 69",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        3092944
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "88-89"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/91/0069-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "449 N.E.2d 110",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "96 Ill. 2d 81",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        3114976
      ],
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "87"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/96/0081-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "454 N.E.2d 197",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "year": 1983,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "97 Ill. 2d 104",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        5516573
      ],
      "year": 1983,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "126"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/97/0104-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "493 N.E.2d 1022",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "year": 1983,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "112 Ill. 2d 378",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        5538842
      ],
      "year": 1983,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "394-95"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/112/0378-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "605 F. Supp. 707",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "F. Supp.",
      "case_ids": [
        3752767
      ],
      "year": 1986,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "710"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/f-supp/605/0707-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "617 F. Supp. 893",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "F. Supp.",
      "case_ids": [
        3792584
      ],
      "year": 1985,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "895"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/f-supp/617/0893-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "464 N.E.2d 857",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "124 Ill. App. 3d 852",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        3429221
      ],
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "862"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/124/0852-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "465 N.E.2d 658",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "year": 1984,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "124 Ill. App. 3d 1082",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        3429578
      ],
      "year": 1984,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "1085"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/124/1082-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "111 Ill. 2d 568",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "year": 1984,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "485 N.E.2d 1208",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "year": 1986,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "138 Ill. App. 3d 457",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        8499165
      ],
      "year": 1986,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "459"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/138/0457-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "459 N.E.2d 935",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "year": 1985,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "99 Ill. 2d 344",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        3163022
      ],
      "year": 1985,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "349"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/99/0344-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 453,
    "char_count": 6883,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.759,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.977148196885064e-08,
      "percentile": 0.37183808785763184
    },
    "sha256": "b9b26106cbf4175cb8a90555a9d84aeca89112655ce4658cae9cdaff479e3851",
    "simhash": "1:16bad88b70d72b66",
    "word_count": 1080
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:17:24.109479+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "J. M. KREJCI COMPANY, INC., Plaintiff, v. SAINT FRANCIS HOSPITAL OF EVANSTON et al., Defendants (Mittelbusher & Tourtelot et al., Third-Party Plaintiffs-Appellants; St. Francis Hospital of Evanston, Third-Party Defendant-Appellant)."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PRESIDING JUSTICE SULLIVAN\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nThis interlocutory appeal is from an order of the trial court dismissing the third-party complaint filed by Mittelbusher & Tourtelot and Schmidt, Garden & Erikson (the architects) against St. Francis Hospital of Evanston (St. Francis). On appeal, the architects contend that their third-party complaint states causes of action for contribution and indemnity.\nPlaintiff entered into a contract with defendant, St. Francis Hospital, for plumbing and fire-protection work for the hospital. The architects were employed to perform architectural services with respect to that project, and those services included certain supervisory functions. Plaintiff alleged that it had not been paid for its performance of additional work which was not covered by the contract and which had been requested by St. Francis and the architects. Plaintiff\u2019s amended complaint contained one count against St. Francis for breach of contract and another against the architects for negligent performance of their duties. The trial court entered summary judgment in favor of St. Francis on the count against it, and the architects then filed a third-party complaint seeking contribution and indemnity from St. Francis based upon alleged breaches of its contractual duties to plaintiff. The duties on which the architects rely concern scheduling and coordination of the progress of the work. The trial court dismissed the third-party complaint, from which order the architects have appealed.\nOpinion\nThe architects contend that St. Francis is liable to them in tort for negligent breach of its contractual duties to plaintiff. We disagree.\nSection 302(a) of the Contribution Among Joint Tortfeasors Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1985, ch. 70, par. 302(a)), provides:\n\u201cExcept as otherwise provided in this Act, where 2 or more persons are subject to liability in tort arising out of the same injury to person or property, or the same wrongful death, there is a right of contribution among them, even though judgment has not been entered against any or all of them.\u201d\nThus the Act expressly requires each party to the contribution action to be \u201csubject to liability in tort\u201d to the injured party (the original plaintiff). (Heinrich v. Peabody International Corp. (1984), 99 Ill. 2d 344, 349, 459 N.E.2d 935; Jodelis v. Harris (1985), 138 Ill. App. 3d 457, 459, 485 N.E.2d 1208, appeal allowed (1986), 111 Ill. 2d 568; Roberts v. Heilgeist (1984), 124 Ill. App. 3d 1082, 1085, 465 N.E.2d 658; Wheeler v. Ellison (1984), 124 Ill. App. 3d 852, 862, 464 N.E.2d 857.) In the case at bar, St. Francis, the third-party defendant, is not \u201csubject to liability in tort\u201d to Krejci, the original plaintiff. Accordingly, St. Francis cannot be liable to the architects.\nInitially, we observe that plaintiff\u2019s claim against St. Francis was based on breach of contract, not negligence. Contribution, however, is predicated upon tort, not contract, liability. U.S. Home Corp. v. George W. Kennedy Construction Co. (N.D. Ill. 1985), 617 F. Supp. 893, 895; Intamin, Inc. v. Figley-Wright Contractors, Inc. (N.D. Ill. 1985), 605 F. Supp. 707, 710; Scott & Fetzer Co. v. Montgomery Ward & Co. (1986), 112 Ill. 2d 378, 394-95, 493 N.E.2d 1022; Coney v. J.L.G. Industries, Inc. (1983), 97 Ill. 2d 104, 126, 454 N.E.2d 197; Maxfield v. Simmons (1983), 96 Ill. 2d 81, 87, 449 N.E.2d 110.\nAssuming, arguendo, that breach of contract may, under certain circumstances, result in tort liability, it is clear that there is no recovery in tort for purely economic losses that result from a breach of contract. (Moorman Manufacturing Co. v. National Tank Co. (1982), 91 Ill. 2d 69, 435 N.E.2d 443.) Even prior to the definitive Moorman decision, the Illinois courts had recognized that purely economic loss caused by the failure to perform contractual duties is not recoverable under tort theories when the parties to the litigation are in privity of contract. (See Palatine National Bank v. Charles W. Greengard Associates, Inc. (1983), 119 Ill. App. 3d 376, 379-80, 456 N.E.2d 635 (and the cases cited therein).) The parties agree that plaintiff\u2019s action against St. Francis sought to recover only economic loss caused by its alleged breach of its contract with plaintiff. Under the applicable case law, plaintiff\u2019s remedy was in contract, not tort. St. Francis was not \u201csubject to liability in tort\u201d to plaintiff and therefore was not a tortfeasor from whom the architects could seek contribution.\nThe architects\u2019 third-party complaint included one count for contribution and another for implied indemnity based on active-passive negligence. We have determined that St. Francis was not \u201csubject to liability in tort\u201d to Krejci. Although this finding applies to both counts of the third-party complaint, we also note that our supreme court recently has held that the Contribution Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1985, ch. 70, par. 301 et seq.), has obviated \u201cthe need for implied indemnity based upon an active-passive distinction\u201d and that \u201c[ajctive-passive indemnity is no longer a viable doctrine for shifting the entire cost of tortious conduct from one tortfeasor to another.\u201d (Allison v. Shell Oil Co. (1986), 113 Ill. 2d 26, 34-35, 495 N.E.2d 496.) This provides an additional ground for affirming the dismissal of the implied-indemnity count.\nFor the foregoing reasons, the order of the trial court dismissing the third-party complaint is affirmed.\nAffirmed.\nMURRAY and PINCHAM, JJ., concur.\nIn Moorman, the supreme court acknowledged that economic loss is recoverable in tort where one intentionally makes false representations (Soules v. General Motors Corp. (1980), 79 Ill. 2d 282, 402 N.E.2d 599), and where one who is in the business of supplying information for the guidance of others in their business transactions makes negligent representations (Rozny v. Marnul (1969), 43 Ill. 2d 54, 250 N.E.2d 656). (Moorman Manufacturing Co. v. National Tank Co. (1982), 91 Ill. 2d 69, 88-89, 435 N.E.2d 443.) Neither exception is applicable here.\nIn view of the facts presented in this appeal, we need not decide whether economic losses are recoverable in tort where the parties are not in privity of contract or where the losses resulted from a defendant\u2019s negligent violation of professional standards of care and skill.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PRESIDING JUSTICE SULLIVAN"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "McKenna, Storer, Rowe, White & Farrug, of Chicago (Robert S. Soder-strom, James P. DeNardo, and Thomas R. Schutt, of counsel), for appellants.",
      "Tyrone C. Fahner, Danuta Bembenista Panich, and Rosanne J. Farad, all of Mayer, Brown & Platt, of Chicago, for appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "J. M. KREJCI COMPANY, INC., Plaintiff, v. SAINT FRANCIS HOSPITAL OF EVANSTON et al., Defendants (Mittelbusher & Tourtelot et al., Third-Party Plaintiffs-Appellants; St. Francis Hospital of Evanston, Third-Party Defendant-Appellant).\nFirst District (5th Division)\nNo. 85\u20142691\nOpinion filed October 10, 1986.\nMcKenna, Storer, Rowe, White & Farrug, of Chicago (Robert S. Soder-strom, James P. DeNardo, and Thomas R. Schutt, of counsel), for appellants.\nTyrone C. Fahner, Danuta Bembenista Panich, and Rosanne J. Farad, all of Mayer, Brown & Platt, of Chicago, for appellees."
  },
  "file_name": "0396-01",
  "first_page_order": 418,
  "last_page_order": 421
}