Chicago Smokeless Fuel Gas Co. v. Lyman
Appellate Court of Illinois
Mechanic’s Lien.—Error to the Circuit Court "of Cook County: the Hon. Thomas G. Windes, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1895. Statement of the Case. This was a proceeding to enforce a mechanic’s lien, brought by the Marinette Iron Works Company, on September 9, 1891, against the Chicago Smokeless Fuel Gas Company et al.; W. C. Lyman, another lien claimant and now defendant in error, was made a party to the bill.
Read the full summary
Mechanic’s Lien.—Error to the Circuit Court "of Cook County: the Hon. Thomas G. Windes, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1895. Statement of the Case. This was a proceeding to enforce a mechanic’s lien, brought by the Marinette Iron Works Company, on September 9, 1891, against the Chicago Smokeless Fuel Gas Company et al.; W. C. Lyman, another lien claimant and now defendant in error, was made a party to the bill. Lyman filed his answer to the bill on the 9th day of January, 1892, and on the 11 th day of January, 1892, filed a cross-bill and a supplemental bill,…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Waterman
The leasehold interest of the Smokeless Gas Company was one upon which a mechanic’s lien may be placed, and the improvements placed thereon, a gas plant, were such as, if they added to the value of such interest, would create a lien.
The fixtures of the Gas company, excepting those supplied by the defendant in error, were, after a lien therefor had attached, removed by Chisholm.
The removal of such materials at such time did not destroy any lien. The mechanic’s lien is upon the entire interest of the owner in the premises, and is on account of the additional value imparted to such interest by…
2Cited by2 opinions
- California Steel Co. v. Dodds (In Re California Steel Co.)United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · 1982
- Andrews Heating Co. v. AbbottAppellate Court of Illinois · 1908