Legal Opinion
In re Gould Coupler Co.
New York Supreme Court
Decided June 20, 1894PublishedCited by 6 opinions
Appeal from special term, Erie county. Motion by the Kellogg Iron Works to continue a mechanic’s lien against the Gould Coupler Company. The motion was granted, •and the coupler company appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtDwight, P. J.
The motion which resulted in the order appealed from was made under the provisions of section 6, c. 342, of the Laws of 1885. The section, as printed and punctuated in the ¡Session Laws, reads as follows::
*623“No lien provided for in this act shall bind the property therein described, ■ for a longer period than one year after the notice of lien has been filed, tinless within that time an action is commenced to enforce the same; and if the action is in a court of record, a notice of the pendency of such action is filed with the county clerk of the county in which such notice of lien is filed,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Raven v. SmithNew York Supreme Court · 1893
- Biershenk v. StokesNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1892
3Cited by6 opinions
- Lycee Francais v. CalagnaNew York Supreme Court · 1960
- Smith v. FleischmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
- Parisi v. HubbardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1929
- Cavalluzzo v. DiamondNew York Supreme Court · 1922
- Barnes Construction Corp. v. St. Bonaventure UniversityNew York Supreme Court · 1986
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.