Badger Lumber Co. v. Ballentine, Foster & Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Jackson Cirmit Court. — Hon. Mathew Eyre, Special Judge. , . ,(1,)..A failure to include all such houses in the mechanic’s lien statement required to be filed with the clerk renders the same invalid as to those which are included therein, because it fails to bind those which are omitted'. Bice v. Nautasket Co., 140 Mass. 256; Foster v. Cox, 123 Mass. 44; Stevens v. Lincoln, 114 Mass. 476; Schuleriburg v. Vrooman, 7 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Jackson Cirmit Court. — Hon. Mathew Eyre, Special Judge. , . ,(1,)..A failure to include all such houses in the mechanic’s lien statement required to be filed with the clerk renders the same invalid as to those which are included therein, because it fails to bind those which are omitted'. Bice v. Nautasket Co., 140 Mass. 256; Foster v. Cox, 123 Mass. 44; Stevens v. Lincoln, 114 Mass. 476; Schuleriburg v. Vrooman, 7 Mo. App. 133; McCauley v. Mildrum, 1 Daly (N. Y.), 396. (2) The cestui que trust in a deed of trust is not bound unless made a party to the suit in time, and a sale…
1Opinion of the CourtGill, J.
— This is an action to enforce a mechanics’ lien. Defendant Young was the owner of certain contiguous lots in Kansas City having a frontage of one hundred and twenty feet, and he contracted with defendants, Ballentine, Foster & Co., for the erection of four houses thereon, each occupying thirty feet front. Said Ballentine, Foster & Co. purchased the necessary lumber from the plaintiff.
While the buildings were in course of construction Young borrowed certain sums of money from the defendant Alliance Trust Company and the Scottish-American Mortgage Company, and to secure same made four several…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- White Lake Lumber Co. v. StoneNebraska Supreme Court · 1886
3Cited by1 opinion
- Van Santvoord v. SmithSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1900