Legal Opinion

Roobin v. Grindle

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided April 4, 1929No. 6 Div. 124PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.

The purpose of the bill is to enforce the statutory lien given by section 8832 of the Code of 1923 to “every mechanic, person, firm, or corporation who shall do or perform any work, or labor upon, or furnish any material, fixture, engine, boiler, or machinery for any building or, improvement on land, or for repairing, altering, or beautify-’ ing the same, under or by virtue of any con-' tract with the owner or proprietor thereof,” etc.

As a basis for the relief, the bill avers that complainants and respondent “entered into a contract whereby it was agreed that said complainants would build for…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Fike v. StrattonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1911
  2. Crawford v. KirkseySupreme Court of Alabama · 1874
  3. Sloss-Sheffield Steel & Iron Co. v. PayneSupreme Court of Alabama · 1915
  4. Tait v. American Freehold Land Mortgage Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1902
  5. Wahouma Drug Co. v. Kirkpatrick Sand & Cement Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1914

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Odom v. HullSupreme Court of Alabama · 1995
  2. Byrum Hardware Co. v. Jenkins Bldg. Supply Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1933
  3. J.F.S. v. Mobile County Department of Human ResourcesCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 2009
  4. Nelson Weaver Mortgage Co. v. Dover Elevator Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1968
  5. Brown v. OldhamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1955

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API