fees owed or claimed to be owed” to Howard & Bowie. The agreement, however, does not establish any liability for attorney fees and does not require the Collinses to pay anything to Howard & Bowie. Indeed, pursuant to the agreement, Howard & Bowie’s claim for attorney fees against the Collins-es was dismissed without prejudice. [¶ 21] The assignment, rather than giving Howard & Bowie the right to bring its quantum meruit claim directly against Cloutier & Briggs, merely allows Howard & Bowie to enforce the terms of the indemnity agreement. Howard & Bowie, however, cannot recover pursuant to the indemnity agreement because “[t]here must be proof of damage actually suffered ... to enable one to maintain an action upon a contract of indemnity.” Hussey v. Collins, 30 Me. 190, 192 (1849) (<HOLDING>); see also Peerless Div., Lear Siegler, Inc. v.
holding that even where judgment had been rendered against the indemnitees the indemnitees could not recover from the indemnitor without proof that the indemnitees had actually paid any thing on account of that suit holding that plaintiff could recover medical fees not actually paid by the insurance company pursuant to an insurance contract holding that default judgment could not be rendered after the defendant had served plaintiff with a copy of a motion to dismiss that had not then been filed holding that court had jurisdiction where no separate judgment had been entered even though notice of appeal was not timely filed as measured from the final decision holding that indemnitees could recover their attorneys fees and costs from an indemnitor despite the fact that the fees and costs had been paid directly by an insurer and noting that the indemnitor is not relieved from liability either on the theory that the insurer is entitled to reimbursement out of the indemnitees recovery  or that the defendant should not benefit from a contract providently made and paid for by the plaintiff 