Legal Opinion

McCarty v. Burnet

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1882No. 9008PublishedCited by 19 opinions

From the Knox Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtElliott, J.

It is necessary, in an action for the enforcement of a mechanic’s lien, to file the original notice or a copy with the complaint. Busenbark v. Etchison Ditching Ass’n, 62 Ind. 314. This is the rule where the entire cause of action depends upon the validity of the lien. It must, therefore, be done in cases where the claim is by a material-man or sub-contractor who has furnished materials to, or has done work for, the original or principal contractor. It is always necessary where the sole relief sought is the foreclosure of the lien, for without the notice there is no lien to enforce.

Where a…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Bayless v. GlennIndiana Supreme Court · 1880
  2. Peoria Marine & Fire Insurance v. WalserIndiana Supreme Court · 1864
  3. Teal v. SpanglerIndiana Supreme Court · 1880
  4. Ombony v. . JonesNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
  5. Wilkerson v. RustIndiana Supreme Court · 1877

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. People's Savings, Loan & Building Ass'n v. SpearsIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
  2. Scott v. GoldinghorstIndiana Supreme Court · 1890
  3. Wilkins v. AbellSupreme Court of Colorado · 1899
  4. Hopkins v. HudsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1886
  5. Rusche v. PittmanIndiana Court of Appeals · 1904

14 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