Legal Opinion

Parris v. Tennessee Power Co.

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided September 15, 1916Published

PROM PORK. Appeal from the Chancery Court of Polk County to the Court of Civil Appeals, and by certiorari to the Court of Civil Appeals from the Supreme Court. —Foss H. Merge®, Chancellor.

1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Neil

The bill in this case was filed by Parris and numerous other persons to have declared their lien upon a line of railway belonging to the defendant for the amounts due them for labor done for George Richmond, a subcontractor under the Converse Bridge Company, in constructing bridge work on the line. The lien is claimed under, section 1 of chapter 98, of the Acts of 1891. So much of the section as need be copied reads:

“Hereafter every subcontractor, laborer, mate-rialman or other person who performs any part of the work in grading any railroad company’s roadway, *200or who constructs or aids in the…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Coughlan v. City of CambridgeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1896
  2. Winters v. City of DuluthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1901
  3. Ellington v. Beaver Dam Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1893
  4. Schus v. Powers-Simpson Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1902
  5. Cunningham v. NealTexas Supreme Court · 1908

18 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