Barker & Stewart Lumber Co. v. Marathon Paper Mills Co.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of tbe circuit court for Marathón county: A. H. Reid, Circuit Judge. This is a mechanic’s lien action brought by materialmen to enforce liens upon the defendants’ concrete dam in the Wisconsin river, for materials consisting of lumber, timber,, and hardware sold by them to one Painter, the principal contractor, and which the plaintiffs claim were furnished for, in,, and about the- erection and construction of the dam within the meaning of the…
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of tbe circuit court for Marathón county: A. H. Reid, Circuit Judge. This is a mechanic’s lien action brought by materialmen to enforce liens upon the defendants’ concrete dam in the Wisconsin river, for materials consisting of lumber, timber,, and hardware sold by them to one Painter, the principal contractor, and which the plaintiffs claim were furnished for, in,, and about the- erection and construction of the dam within the meaning of the mechanic’s lien statute. The facts were not substantially in dispute. On May 3,. 1909, one George M. Painter contracted with the…
1Opinion of the CourtWiNsnow, C. J.
Our statute (sec.. 3314, Stats. 1898) gives a mechanic’s lien to every principal contractor who furnishes materials “for or in or about the erection, construction, repair,” etc., of any structure which becomes part of the freehold. By another-section (sec. 3315, Stats. 1898), under certain circumstances, a like lien is given to a material-man who furnishes any materials to the principal contractor “in any of the cases mentioned” in sec. 3314. In either case, *16therefore, tbe lien is given for materials furnished “for or in or about” the erection of the structure, and the exact question here is…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Schaghticoke Powder Co. v. Greenwich & Johnsonville Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1905
- George H. Sampson Co. v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
- Giant Powder Co. v. San Diego Flume Co.California Supreme Court · 1889
- Winslow v. UrquhartWisconsin Supreme Court · 1875
- Giant-Powder Co. v. Oregon Pac. Ry. Co.District Court, D. Oregon · 1890
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by43 opinions
- Hoier v. KaplanIllinois Supreme Court · 1924
- Chicago Lumber Co. v. DouglasSupreme Court of Kansas · 1913
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. California-Arizona Construction Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1920
- Johnson v. StarrettSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
- Chamberlain v. City of LewistonIdaho Supreme Court · 1912
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.