Barnett's v. Clooney
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Pembeook R. Elitoeaet, Judge. The variance between Banker and Edwards in the first notice, and Banker and Edwards Building Company in the lien was immaterial. Banker and Edwards was the name first entered in the books of plaintiff. They were known by that name, both by plaintiff and defendant. Slmeffer v. Phoenix Breiuing Co., 4 Mo. App. 1Í5; International Ins. Co. v. Davenport et al., 57 Mo. 289; Hashells, 14 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Pembeook R. Elitoeaet, Judge. The variance between Banker and Edwards in the first notice, and Banker and Edwards Building Company in the lien was immaterial. Banker and Edwards was the name first entered in the books of plaintiff. They were known by that name, both by plaintiff and defendant. Slmeffer v. Phoenix Breiuing Co., 4 Mo. App. 1Í5; International Ins. Co. v. Davenport et al., 57 Mo. 289; Hashells, 14 Mo. App. 100; President,, etc., of St. Vincent College v. Shaefer, 109 Mo. 268. Plaintiff is entitled to only one valid lien for the…
1Opinion of the CourtRombauee, P. J.
The plaintiff recovered a judgment on mechanic’s lien against the property of the appellant. The latter assigns two errors which he claims should lead to the reversal of the judgment. One is that there is no substantial evidence in the record that the material sued for entered into the construction of building; the other is that the plaintiff needlessly filed two mechanic’s liens for the same account, and thereby lost his right to enforce either. The cause was tried by the court sitting as a jury, and the only instruction asked by the defendant was one in the nature of a demurrer to the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Williams v. Chicago, Santa Fe & California Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1892
- South Missouri Lumber Co. v. WrightSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- Mulloy v. LawrenceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1862
- Davis v. SchulerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1866
3Cited by1 opinion
- Fox v. Benham Manufacturing Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1917