Legal Opinion
Pfister v. Stumm
The Superior Court of New York City
Decided March 15, 1894PublishedCited by 3 opinions
Motion to confirm the report of a referee and for an extra allowance to defendant.
1Opinion of the Court
Titus, Ch. J.
This action was brought to foreclose a mechanic’s lien. The complaint alleges : (1) The ownership of the premises in the defendant; (2) the making of the contract; (3) the assignment of the contract to the plaintiff; (4) full performance of the contract; (5) that there is now due and owing the plaintiff on the contract the sum of $300, and (6) the performance of extra work and materials furnished, of the value of $245.92.
The answer admits the making of the contract, but interposes a counterclaim for nonperformance of the contract to the extent of $350. At the time of serving the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Bathgate v. . HaskinNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Lumbard v. Syracuse, Binghamton & New York RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Bridenbecker v. JohnsonNew York Supreme Court · 1858
- Bettis v. GoodwillNew York Supreme Court · 1866
3Cited by3 opinions
- Kiernan v. Agricultural InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
- Kiernan v. Agricultural InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
- Schulte v. Lestershire Boot & Shoe Co.New York Supreme Court · 1895