Legal Opinion
Dearstine v. Dunckel
New York Supreme Court
Decided December 15, 1926PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtStaley, J.
This is an action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien on premises known as 105 Ryckman avenue, Albany, N. Y., owned by Fayette D. Dunckel and Sarah V. Dunckel. The claim of the defendant owners is that the contractors failed to perform their contract in a good and workmanlike manner, and that the last payment, amounting to $3,000, has not been earned.
The contract, plans and specifications were drawn by the contractors, Frank & Bowers. They provided for the erection of a dwelling house. Work was started in the winter or late fall. During the progress of the work the house began to settle, until it…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Genet v. President of the Delaware & Hudson Canal Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1893
- Tompkins v. . DudleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1862
- Fallon v. . LawlerNew York Court of Appeals · 1886
- E. T. Burrowes Co. v. Rapid Safety Filter Co.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1906
- Kuhs v. Flower City Tissue Mills Co.New York Supreme Court · 1918
3Cited by4 opinions
- Lewis v. Anchorage Asphalt Paving Co.Alaska Supreme Court · 1975
- Rubin v. ColesCity of New York Municipal Court · 1931
- Beacon Plaza Shopping Center, Inc. v. TRI-CITIES CONSTRUCTION & SUPPLY CO.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1966
- Seawane Greens, Inc. v. BaileyNew York Supreme Court · 1960