Sheffield Furnace Co. v. Witherow
Supreme Court of the United States
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA. On May 27, 1886, the appellee, plaintiff below, made a proposition to defendant to, construct on its premises a blast furnace for the sum of $124,000; $80,000 to be paid on monthly.estimates as the work, progressedthe balance to be secured, “ said security to be either a mechanics’ lien or first mortgage on all the furnace company’s interests in Sheffield, : . at my option.”
Read the full summary
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA. On May 27, 1886, the appellee, plaintiff below, made a proposition to defendant to, construct on its premises a blast furnace for the sum of $124,000; $80,000 to be paid on monthly.estimates as the work, progressedthe balance to be secured, “ said security to be either a mechanics’ lien or first mortgage on all the furnace company’s interests in Sheffield, : . at my option.” This' proposition was accepted on June 2. The work was completed and accepted on April 24, 1888. On June 27, 1888, plaintiff filed…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Beewek
Inasmuch as the so-called demurrer was fatally defective in lacking the affidavit of defendant and certificate of counsel, required by rule 31, there was no error in disregarding it, and entering a décree pro confesso at the November rules. Equity Rule 18; National Bank v. Insurance Company, 104 U. S. 54, 76. And such a decree after the November rules would entitle the. plaintiff to a final decree as taken on December 19, Equity Rule 19; Thomson v. Wooster, 114 U. S. 104, unless something had" taken place intermediate to takeaway such right. It appears that on the 14th day of November the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- National Bank v. Insurance Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Scott v. NeelySupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Thomson v. WoosterSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Whitehead v. ShattuckSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Ketchum v. St. LouisSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by52 opinions
- Taylor v. Louisville & N. R.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1898
- Commissioners of Road Improvement District No. 2 v. St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Humble Oil & Refining Co. v. Sun Oil Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1951
- Hooven, Owens & Rentschler, Co. v. John Featherstone's SonsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1901
- Hatcher v. Hendrie & Bolthoff Mfg. & Supply Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1904
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.