Defendant KH entered into annexation agreement with City as to 300-acre parcel within City limits that Defendant intended to develop into subdivision. Defendant went bankrupt before completing the public improvements required by annexation agreement. Before and during bankruptcy proceeding, 2 other Defendants (TRG and WRH) purchased lots in subdivision from Defendant KH. City sufficiently alleged that TRG and WRH were successor developers under Annexation Agreement, and that they breached Agreement by failing to finish public improvements.Complaints adequately alleged that, when WRH acquired KH's interest in subdivision, a surety relationship arose by operation of law, making WRH the principal obligor and thus liable to Fidelity, as surety. Fidelity properly pled, as a basis for relief, implied promise by KH and its successors to reimburse Fidelity for its losses. (HUTCHINSON and ZENOFF, concurring.)
Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Annexation