Cox v. Croft
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 182, Oct. T., 1908, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., March T., 1908, No. 924, M. L. D., making absolute rule to strike off lien in case of Frank D. Cox, trading as C. A. Cox’s Sons, v. Samuel B. Croft, owner or reputed owner, and Peter J. Foley, contractor. Rule to strike off mechanic’s lien. The opinion of the Superior Court states the case. Error assigned was order making absolute rule to strike off mechanic's lien.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Head, J.,
The twenty-third section of the Act of June 4,1901, P. L. 431, prescribes the procedure by which the owner of a property, against which a mechanic’s lien has been filed, may have deter*552mined by the proper court the validity of the lien. The proceeding begins by a petition on the part of the property owner setting forth the matters of fact or law upon which he founds his contention that the lien is invalid and should be stricken from the record. The lien claimant is afforded an opportunity to answer. If it appear from the petition and answer that there are any material…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Favo v. MerlotSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- Seelar v. East End Mantel & Tile Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
- Hiestand v. KeathSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
- Hiestand v. KeathSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1910