Smith v. Emerson
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Petition to enforce a mechanic’s lien, alleging that the petitioner made a contract in writing with Luther D. Stiles to furnish the labor and materials, except the brick, necessary in doing the mason-work required in the erection of a block of buildings in Lawrence, according to specifications furnished by Stiles, and describing the land by metes and botinds; that, at the time of the performance of the labor thereon, the lot was the property of Benjamin L. Emerson or of…
Read the full summary
Petition to enforce a mechanic’s lien, alleging that the petitioner made a contract in writing with Luther D. Stiles to furnish the labor and materials, except the brick, necessary in doing the mason-work required in the erection of a block of buildings in Lawrence, according to specifications furnished by Stiles, and describing the land by metes and botinds; that, at the time of the performance of the labor thereon, the lot was the property of Benjamin L. Emerson or of Carrie M. Stiles; that the petitioner fully performed -the contract on his part, and furnished extra labor, by direction of…
1Opinion of the CourtSoule, J.
By the true construction of the contract between the petitioner and Stiles, and the conduct of the parties thereunder, the petitioner did not furnish the brick for the block of stores. The statement of one price for the brick, and another price for the brick when laid, was adopted as a mode of computing the price which the petitioner was to be paid for labor and material and stock furnished in laying the brick; and a sale of the brick to him was not contemplated. Westfield v. Mayo, 122 Mass. 100. The petitioner, therefore, has at best only a demand for labor and materials furnished under a…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Inhabitants of Westfield v. MayoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
3Cited by1 opinion
- Moore v. DuganMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1901