Legal Opinion

Dillon v. Hart

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided November 20, 1893PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal from Multnomah: Loyal B. Stearns, Judge. Suit by H. E. Dillon against J. D. Hart and C. 0. Newcastle to enforce an alleged lien for material said to have been furnishe.d to Cramer & Krupke, who were erecting a building on the land of the defendants. Decree for plaintiff, and defendants appeal.

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Bean.

This is a suit by a sub-contractor to foreclose a mechanic’s lien upon the real property of the defendants for labor and material furnished and used in the construction of a building thereon. The portion of the claim of lien material to the question presented on this appeal, is as follows:—

“ Know all men by these presents, that I, H. E. Dillon, of the city of Portland, in the county of Multnomah, state of Oregon, have, by virtue of a contract heretofore made with Cramer & Krupke, partners, of Portland, of the county of Multnomah, Oregon, who were the contractors and…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Rankin v. MalarkeyOregon Supreme Court · 1893

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Curtis v. SestanovichOregon Supreme Court · 1894
  2. Getty v. AmesOregon Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Leick v. BeersOregon Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Riggen v. PerkinsIdaho Supreme Court · 1926
  5. Barton v. RoseOregon Supreme Court · 1906

2 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