Potshuisky v. Krempkan
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Bexar. Tried below before the Hon. Thomas J. Devine. On the 6th of March, 1857, one Otto Bombach instituted suit in the District Court of Bexar county against Potshuisky, the appellant, for the enforcement of a mechanic’s lien; and in his petition made the appellee, Krempkan, and several other persons, also, defendants, in virtue of rights and interests claimed by them in the property upon which the lien was sought to be enforced.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Bexar. Tried below before the Hon. Thomas J. Devine. On the 6th of March, 1857, one Otto Bombach instituted suit in the District Court of Bexar county against Potshuisky, the appellant, for the enforcement of a mechanic’s lien; and in his petition made the appellee, Krempkan, and several other persons, also, defendants, in virtue of rights and interests claimed by them in the property upon which the lien was sought to be enforced. In the course of the subsequent proceedings, the suit was dismissed as to the plaintiff, Bombach, and all the defendants except Potshuisky and Krempkan;…
1Opinion of the CourtMoobe, J.
The appellant insists, that as it appeared at the time of the trial, that he had paid appellee more than the amount he had agreed to pay him for the masonry work in the first contract that was made between them, appellee's mechanic’s lien was extinguished ; and although he should have had judgment for the additional amount that was still due, yet as the premises were appellant's homestead, appellee was not entitled to a decree for their sale by virtue of his trust deed.
This position, however, we do not think can be successfully maintained. Although the amount for which appellant executed the…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Baird v. TriceTexas Supreme Court · 1879
- Mabry v. HarrisonTexas Supreme Court · 1875
- Batts v. ScottTexas Supreme Court · 1873
- Cocke v. EspinozaCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1924
- Bonner v. MinnierMontana Supreme Court · 1893
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.