Legal Opinion

Heyde v. Sult

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided January 5, 1899No. 2,708PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Erom the Marshall Oirctiit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtRobinson, J.

— Appellees Conrad Suit and John Rails-back, under the firm name of Suit & Railsback begun suit against appellants Philip ITeyde and Maggie Heyde to foreclose a mechanic’s lien on lots seventy-nine and eighty-three in Corbin’s Continued addition to Cougle’s Independence áddition to the town (now city) of Plymouth, Indiana, for material furnished in the erection of a building thereon. Other lienholders were made defendants. Appellant Harley A. Logan was made a defendant, the complaint alleging that he held a mortgage on the real estate.

Appellants Heyde, Heyde, and Logan answered — first, in…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Otis v. GregoryIndiana Supreme Court · 1887
  2. Scott v. GoldinghorstIndiana Supreme Court · 1890
  3. Bronnenburg v. RinkerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1891
  4. Warden v. NolanIndiana Court of Appeals · 1894
  5. Gibbs v. ElyIndiana Court of Appeals · 1895

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Town of Cicero v. Lake Erie & Western RailroadIndiana Court of Appeals · 1912
  2. Spitzmesser v. SpitzmesserIndiana Court of Appeals · 1901

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API