Legal Opinion · Dissent

H & R Plumbing & Heating, Inc. v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided May 20, 1987No. 15360Published

1DissentSabers, Justice

I dissent.

The trial court held that:

The Plaintiff’s Lien is invalid and thus its Complaint insofar as it seeks a foreclosure must be denied. However, it will stand to the extent that the Complaint demands Judgment against Defendants, Clair F. Wieseler, AJH, Inc., and Alex Group.

*154If it is valid for judgment purposes, why isn’t it valid for mechanic’s lien purposes?

In Ringgenberg v. Wilmsmeyer, 253 N.W.2d 197 (S.D.1977), this court held that: “ ‘Where the work is contracted for as an entirety for a specific amount, ... all the information is given that is needed or can reasonably be required.’ ”…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Mississippi Woodworking Company v. MaherMissouri Court of Appeals · 1954
  2. Wadsworth Homes, Inc. v. Woodridge CorporationMissouri Court of Appeals · 1962
  3. Ringgenberg v. WilmsmeyerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1977
  4. Taylor v. NetherwoodSupreme Court of Virginia · 1895
  5. Mebane Lumber Co. v. Avery & Bullock Builders, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1967

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API