Morgan v. Arthurs & Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the common pleas of Alleghany county. This was a scire facias upon a mechanic’s lien, instituted by the defendants in error against James B. Morgan, who was sued with Jean Barbeau, for work done and materials furnished in the erection of a steam saw-mill on the premises of Morgan,' in the Northern Liberties of Pittsburgh.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the common pleas of Alleghany county. This was a scire facias upon a mechanic’s lien, instituted by the defendants in error against James B. Morgan, who was sued with Jean Barbeau, for work done and materials furnished in the erection of a steam saw-mill on the premises of Morgan,' in the Northern Liberties of Pittsburgh. The plaintiffs below produced an account of castings, &c. furnished by them at the request of Barbeau for the purpose of being used in the erection of a steam engine for propelling the saw-mill, and proved the actual employment of the articles furnished for that…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam. —
Gray v. Holdship is stronger than the present case, and entirely decisive of the point in controversy. A copper kettle in a brew-house might perhaps be more readily conceived, in favour of trade, not to be a fixture or part of the building, than the engine which propels a steam saw-mill, and which does the usual ofiice of a water wheel; for it would not be pretended that the running gears of a mill are not part of the building. The words of the law are very general, and it is impossible to doubt that the plaintiffs are within its protection.
Judgment affirmed.
2Cited by10 opinions
- Walker v. ShermanNew York Supreme Court · 1839
- Hooven, Owens & Rentschler, Co. v. John Featherstone's SonsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1901
- Gale v. WardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1817
- Oves v. OgelsbySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1838
- Parrish & Hazard's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1877
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.