Basham v. Toors
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Pulaski Circuit Court. J. W. Martin, Judge. 1. The act of March 17, 1885, will be strictly construed, and all persons claiming rights thereunder will be held to a strict compliance with the terms of the same.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Pulaski Circuit Court. J. W. Martin, Judge. 1. The act of March 17, 1885, will be strictly construed, and all persons claiming rights thereunder will be held to a strict compliance with the terms of the same. While we admit that as between the owner, who contracts, and the mechanic with whom he contracts, statutes of this character will be liberally construed, and a substantial compliance with the terms thereof be held sufficieht, yet all the courts hold that a statute which authorizes property to be encumbered without resort to legal process, and by one with whom the owner has no…
1Opinion of the CourtCockrill, C. J.
This is a suit by Toors against Basham to enforce a mechanic’s lien. Basham, who was the owner of certain town lots, let a contract to one Moyer to improve a house situated thereon for a stipulated compensation. Moyer got Toors to furnish materials for the purpose. Moyer had not proceeded far with the work when he discovered that he would lose money by complying with the contract and abandoned it. He and Basham then agreed to divide the loss equally between them and Basham took up the work where Moyer left it and completed the improvement. Toors presented to Basham an account for the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Laird v. MoonanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1884
- Deardorff v. EverharttSupreme Court of Missouri · 1881
3Cited by3 opinions
- Hull v. Massachusetts Bonding & InsuranceSupreme Court of Kansas · 1912
- Harper v. Galliher & Huguely, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1928
- Hartford Fire Insurance v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905