Legal Opinion

Leifer Manufacturing Co. v. Gross

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided January 24, 1910PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Appeal from Garland Chancery Court; Alphonso Curl, Chancellor; 1. The preponderance of the evidence is to the effect that Gross was a party to the contract, and appellant was not therefore within the statutory requirement as to the giving of ten days’ .notice as subcontractor.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Garland Chancery Court; Alphonso Curl, Chancellor; 1. The preponderance of the evidence is to the effect that Gross was a party to the contract, and appellant was not therefore within the statutory requirement as to the giving of ten days’ .notice as subcontractor. Kirby’s Dig., § § 4976 and 4993. The statute should be liberally construed. 30 Arle. 29; 30 Id. 569; 49 Id. 475 ; 51 Id. 302; 58 Id. 7; 84 Id. 560. 2. The lien was filed in proper time. 56 Ark. 516. 3. The contract was not within the statute of frauds. 76 Ark. 292. 4. The chancellor’s finding being against the…

1Opinion of the CourtFrauenthal, J.

The plaintiff below, Heifer Manufacturing Company, instituted this suit in the Garland Chancery Court against the defendant, B. Gross, upon an account for materials furnished in the construction of a building in the city of Hot Springs, Arkansas. The account consisted principally of concrete building material or blocks, and amounted in the aggregate to $1,016.20. It is credited with a payment of $200, thus leaving a balance of $816.20, for which amount judgment is sought. It is alleged in the complaint that the materials were furnished upon a contract made with the defendant, who is the owner…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. George v. NorwoodSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
  2. Nolen v. HardenSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1884
  3. Kelly v. CarterSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1891
  4. Carr v. FairSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
  5. Laraway v. . PerkinsNew York Court of Appeals · 1852

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Arkmo Lumber Co. v. CantrellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
  2. Zimmerman v. HoltSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
  3. Hess v. A. L. Ferguson Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1922
  4. Kull v. Dierks Lumber & Coal Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
  5. Carroll v. JonesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1963

6 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