Davis v. Farr
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the District Court of the city and county of Philadelphia. John C. Senderling, one of the defendants, contracted with the other defendant, George W. Farr, and a person of the name of Ward, owners of adjoining lots, to build for them two contiguous houses, one on each lot.
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court of the city and county of Philadelphia. John C. Senderling, one of the defendants, contracted with the other defendant, George W. Farr, and a person of the name of Ward, owners of adjoining lots, to build for them two contiguous houses, one on each lot. The buildings were commenced and carried on together, and Senderling, the contractor, bought lumber of the plaintiffs, Samuel H. Davis and Theophilus Fitter, partners, for the two buildings indiscriminately. Upon his becoming in arrear with the plaintiffs, they divided their bill against the two buildings, and filed…
1Opinion of the Court
*169The opinion of the court was delivered by
Burnside, J.
Our mechanics’ liens are now permanently established by legislative enactment and judicial decisions. It has become a part of our system, and it is our duty to mould it in accordance with the object and intention of the legislature.
In the case before us, the buildings were adjoining each other. They were commenced and carried on together. Senderling had engaged with Ward and Farr (owners of the adjoining lots) to erect both houses, to find all the materials, and he purchased lumber indiscriminately from the plaintiffs for both buildings.
Send…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Continental Supply Co. v. WhiteMontana Supreme Court · 1932
- Gordon v. NortonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
- Ford v. Springer Land Ass'nNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1895
- Jeannette Planing Mill Co. v. GreenawaltSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1899
- West Philadelphia Brick Co. v. J. D. Johnson & Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1897