Steinkamper v. McManus
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court, Amos M. Thayer, Judge. The unexplained use of technical words in an instruction is misleading, and is ground for a reversal of the judgment. Clarice r. Kitchen, 52 Mo. 316; Carson v. Porter, 22 Mo. App. 179. The technical legal meaning of the word being not essentially different from its meaning in common nse, its nse is not reversible-error. Berry v. Wilson, 64 Mo. 164.
1Opinion of the CourtRoMBauer, J.
This is an action upon a mechanic’s lien, by a material man against the alleged sub-contractor, and the owner of the premises. It is well settled in this state that no recovery can be had charging the premises with a lien in such cases, except as an incident to a personal judgment against some one with whom the contract for the work or material was made, and who himself is either the owner, or standing with the owner, or some-contractor under him, in a contract relation, and then only when the work or material actually entered into the construction of the building or improvement. Wibbing v.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Simmons, Garth & Co. v. CarrierSupreme Court of Missouri · 1875
- Wibbing v. PowersSupreme Court of Missouri · 1857
- Berry v. WilsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1876
3Cited by15 opinions
- Vasquez v. Village Center, Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1962
- Berger v. St. Louis Storage & Commission Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1909
- Morganton Hardware Co. v. Morganton Graded SchoolsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
- Fairgrieve v. City of MoberlyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1888
- MacKlind Investment Co. v. FerrySupreme Court of Missouri · 1937
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.