Legal Opinion

Foster v. Tierney

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided May 21, 1894PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Appeal from Polk District Court. — Hon. W. F. Con-bad, Judge.- The following is appellants’ statement, in argument, of the facts set out in the petition: “The plaintiffs were architects in the city of Des Moines.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Polk District Court. — Hon. W. F. Con-bad, Judge.- The following is appellants’ statement, in argument, of the facts set out in the petition: “The plaintiffs were architects in the city of Des Moines. One J. F. Tierney, the owner of the realty described in the petition, employed them, at an agreed percentage of the cost of certain improvements, to plan, devise, and construct plans and specifications for the remodeling and rebuilding of the building. then standing upon the realty. By virtue of this employment, they were necessarily compelled to go, and did go, upon the premises,…

1Opinion of the Court

Granger, O. J.

*2551 *254A ground of the demurrer is that it appears that the contemplated improvements were not made, nor were the jilans and specifications used; and the legal proposition is presented whether or not, under such circumstances, a mechanic’s lien would attach. By section 3, chapter 100, Acts of the *255Sixteenth. General Assembly, it is provided: “Every mechanic or other person who shall do any labor upon * * * any building, erection, or other improvement upon land * * * shall have for his labor done or materials, machinery, or fixtures furnished, a lien upon such building, erection, or…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Knight v. NorrisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1868
  2. Scott v. GoldinghorstIndiana Supreme Court · 1890
  3. Kelly v. RowaneMissouri Court of Appeals · 1889
  4. Charnley v. HonigWisconsin Supreme Court · 1889

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Freeman v. RinakerIllinois Supreme Court · 1900
  2. Lamoreaux v. AnderschSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
  3. Nolte v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
  4. Fitzgerald v. WalshWisconsin Supreme Court · 1900
  5. Field v. Consolidated Mineral Water Co.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 1903

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API