Collins v. Pennsylvania Railroad
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 35, Oct. T., 1905, by plaintiff, from order of G. P. No. 1, Pbila. Co., Dec. T., 1903, No. 2657 M. L. D., making absolute rule to strike off mechanic’s lien in case of William J. Collins, trading as Joseph H. Collins & Son, v. The Pennsylvania Railroad Company, owner or reputed owner, and M. F. Seeley, J. S. Seeley and C. R. De La Matyr, trading as Seeley, Son & Company, Contractors. Rule to strike off mechanic’s lien. Before Beitleb.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 35, Oct. T., 1905, by plaintiff, from order of G. P. No. 1, Pbila. Co., Dec. T., 1903, No. 2657 M. L. D., making absolute rule to strike off mechanic’s lien in case of William J. Collins, trading as Joseph H. Collins & Son, v. The Pennsylvania Railroad Company, owner or reputed owner, and M. F. Seeley, J. S. Seeley and C. R. De La Matyr, trading as Seeley, Son & Company, Contractors. Rule to strike off mechanic’s lien. Before Beitleb. J. The notice and affidavit were as follows : “ William J. Collins, trading as Joseph H. Collins & Son, v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company, owner or…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Porter, J.,
This mechanic’s lien showed upon its face that the contract under which the plaintiff furnished the materials was made with a person other than the owner, and it was essential, under the provisions of paragraph 11, sec. 11 of the Act of June 4, 1901, P. L. 481, that it should state “ when and how notice was given to the owner of an intention to file the claim.” The court below held the notice set forth in the claim to be insufficient, under the provisions of the 8th sec. of the act of June 4, 1901, and struck off the lien.
We have held, in The Wolf Company v. Pennsylvania…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Hart v. Lehigh Valley RailroadSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
- Keever v. Ulrich, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Dauphin County1927