S. A. Willetts & Co. v. Earl
Supreme Court of New Jersey
On contract. The questions of law arising in the foregoing cause, and reserved for review, are the following, viz.: First. At the trial of this cause before the Circuit Court fhe plaintiff proved-his bill of particulars and rested. The defendant then offered in proof the contracts under which the erection of the buildings had been undertaken by the contractor. These contracts were executed not by Mrs. Earl, as -owner, but by Harry Earl, her husband, in his own name.
Read the full summary
On contract. The questions of law arising in the foregoing cause, and reserved for review, are the following, viz.: First. At the trial of this cause before the Circuit Court fhe plaintiff proved-his bill of particulars and rested. The defendant then offered in proof the contracts under which the erection of the buildings had been undertaken by the contractor. These contracts were executed not by Mrs. Earl, as -owner, but by Harry Earl, her husband, in his own name. It appeared that these contracts had been duly filed before the buildings had been begun. Objection was made by the plaintiffs,…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Dixon, J.
The first question, read in the light of the accompanying case, is whether, when a person makes a written *272contract for the erection of a building, in the name of an agent,, the contract not disclosing the name of the principal, the filing-of such a contract will, under our Mechanics’ Lien law, prevent a lien in favor of any person save the other party to that contract.
The first section of the law gives a lien against every building to every person furnishing labor or materials for its construction. The second section enacts “ that when any…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Murphey-Hardy Lumber Co. v. NicholasSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1901
- Pfeifer v. ReimanNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1932