American Cleaning & Restoration South v. Bibian — Illinois appellate court affirms $254,000 repair-work award

Case
American Cleaning and Restoration South, LLC v. Pascual A. Bibian, Soccoro F. Bibian, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., First Northern Credit Union, Unknown Owners and Non-Record Claimants
Court
Appellate Court of Illinois, Third District
Judge
Justice Peterson
Date Decided
August 19, 2026
Docket No.
3-25-0162
Topics
Quantum meruit; Construction disputes; Evidence; Insurance repairs
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

After a 2020 fire damaged the Bibians’ home, American Cleaning and Restoration South began repair work under an agreement tied to insurance proceeds. A dispute later halted the project, the Bibians hired replacement contractors, and American recorded a lien and sued for, among other claims, quantum meruit.

Following a bench trial, the Will County circuit court awarded American $254,000 on its quantum-meruit claim and rejected the Bibians’ counterclaims for lost-use benefits and repainting costs. The Bibians challenged the admission of a highlighted repair estimate and argued that the damages award and denial of their counterclaims were against the manifest weight of the evidence.

The Court’s Holding

The appellate court held that the trial court erred in admitting the highlighted estimate as a business record. The highlighting was prepared after work stopped, while American was preparing its lien and litigation, rather than at or near the time the listed work was completed.

The error did not require reversal. Testimony established that the completed repair work was valued at about $789,000 and that American had received $535,000 for structural repairs, supporting the $254,000 award. The court also upheld rejection of the counterclaims because evidence conflicted over the causes of project delays and whether repainting was necessary.

Key Takeaways

  • A document prepared for a lien or anticipated litigation does not qualify as a routine business record merely because it relies on business information.
  • An erroneous evidentiary ruling may be harmless where other competent evidence supports the judgment.
  • In a bench trial, appellate courts defer to the trial court’s resolution of conflicting testimony unless the result is against the manifest weight of the evidence.

Why It Matters

The decision illustrates that a contractor can prove quantum-meruit damages through competent testimony and underlying project evidence even when a litigation-prepared summary is inadmissible. It also underscores the importance of contemporaneous project documentation in construction and insurance-repair disputes.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top