Murphy v. Ellis
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 142, Oct. T., 1892, by defendants, Mary E. Ellis et al., from judgment of C. P., No. 2, Allegheny Oo., Oct. T., 1890, No. 500, on verdict for plaintiffs, H. Murphy et al. Scire facias sur mechanics’ lien.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 142, Oct. T., 1892, by defendants, Mary E. Ellis et al., from judgment of C. P., No. 2, Allegheny Oo., Oct. T., 1890, No. 500, on verdict for plaintiffs, H. Murphy et al. Scire facias sur mechanics’ lien. At the trial, before Ewing, P. J., it appeared that by a building contract entered into by Mary E. Ellis, owner, and O. L. Schultz, contractor, it was provided that the latter should “in a good and workmanlike manner, well and substantially erect, build, set up, finish and deliver to the said party of the first part, free and discharged of all claims, liens of mechanics and…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
There was no express covenant against liens in the building contract in this case, nor do we think there was any such implied covenant as to deprive the plaintiffs of their right to lien the building. The whole subject is fully discussed in Nice v. Walker, decided herewith [the preceding case]. That case rules this.
Judgment affirmed.
2Cited by4 opinions
- Morris v. RossSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
- Fidelity Mut. Life Ass'n v. JacksonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894
- Schmid v. Palm Garden Improvement Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894
- Bithell v. DivenSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1901