Pearsons v. Tincker
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On Facts agreed. Case. J. & S. Snowman built a brig by contract. The plaintiff, a ship carpenter, labored for them upon the brig. For that labor the law gave to him a lien. One Mudgett was the master builder, who also had a similar lien of $150. At the request of the Snowmans, the plaintiff paid Mudgett that sum, and took from Snowmans their negotiable note therefor.
Read the full summary
On Facts agreed. Case. J. & S. Snowman built a brig by contract. The plaintiff, a ship carpenter, labored for them upon the brig. For that labor the law gave to him a lien. One Mudgett was the master builder, who also had a similar lien of $150. At the request of the Snowmans, the plaintiff paid Mudgett that sum, and took from Snowmans their negotiable note therefor. To avail himself of his lien, the plaintiff brought a suit against the Snowmans and seasonably attached the brig. Their writ contained a count upon the note and also one upon an account for the plaintiffs personal labor. The…
1Opinion of the Court
Appleton, J. —
The lien given by R. S. c. 125, 35, is only for the benefit of the person performing labor upon or furnishing materials for a vessel. The plaintiff might have enforced this lien for his own but not for the labor of another. The note given for the labor of Mudgett by Snowman, the defendant, in the suit on which the vessel was attached, cannot be regarded as labor performed or materials furnished by the plaintiff. The claim in either case is persbnal, and must fee enforced in the name of the party to whom it accrued. Mudgett could neither directly nor indirectly assign his lien so…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Phillips v. BridgeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
3Cited by9 opinions
- Rosencranz v. Swofford Bros. Dry Goods Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1903
- O'Connor v. Current River RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1892
- Gardner v. Le FevreMichigan Supreme Court · 1914
- Phœnix Mutual Life Insurance v. BatchenAppellate Court of Illinois · 1880
- Brown v. Chicago, Santa Fe & California Railway Co.Court of Appeals of Kansas · 1889
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.