Legal Opinion

Pittman-Berger Co. v. Parkinson

Superior Court of Delaware

Decided August 21, 1935No. Sci fa sur Mechanics Lien, No. 89PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Reinhardt, J.,

delivering the opinion of the Court:

In the introductory part of the statement of claim the claimant alleges that it supplied material and labor under a contract with D. M. Fontana & Sons, Inc., a corporation of the State of Delaware, General Contractors, “agents of the owner” for the erection of a dwelling house, etc. It is contended on the part of the defendant that the use of the words “agents of the owner” is for the purpose of the mechanics’ lien law (29 Del. Laws, c. 225) the same as if the contract had been made by the owner direct. And that the plaintiff, therefore having…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. American Car & Foundry Co. v. Alexandria Water Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
  2. Knabb's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1849
  3. St. Paul & Minneapolis Pressed Brick Co. v. StoutSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
  4. Johnston v. Harrington & SmithWashington Supreme Court · 1892
  5. Great Southern Fireproof Hotel Co. v. JonesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1902

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Mayor & Council v. Recony Sales & Engineering Corp.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1962
  2. J. A. Montgomery, Inc. v. Marks Mobile Homes, Inc.Superior Court of Delaware · 1969
  3. Franklin National Bank v. ScottSuperior Court of Delaware · 1970
  4. PETTINARO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY v. RagoSuperior Court of Delaware · 1970
  5. General Electric Co. v. Kirkwood Industries, Inc.Superior Court of Delaware · 1972

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

Powered by the Exa API