Noel v. Temple
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Scott District Court. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. I. It is expressly declared by the statute that the mechanic shall be entitled to his lien, even if he delay for more than thirty days after the performance of the work. Session Laws of 1857, chap. 220, § 2. The language of the statute is explicit and will not be changed by judicial construetion.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Scott District Court. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. I. It is expressly declared by the statute that the mechanic shall be entitled to his lien, even if he delay for more than thirty days after the performance of the work. Session Laws of 1857, chap. 220, § 2. The language of the statute is explicit and will not be changed by judicial construetion. Foley v. The People, Breese 31; District Township of the Qity of Dubuque v. The City of Dubuque, 7 Iowa 262; Saidler v. Young, 2 Har. & J. 69; Noble v. The State, 1 Greene 330; 1 Kent Com. (7th ed.) 510 ; Pearce v.…
1Opinion of the CourtLowe, C. J.
In July, 1857, plaintiff contracted with the defendant, Thomas Temple, to furnish the material, and to .erect upon his premises a house ; which he claims to have done, as per agreement, and on the 23d of September following, agreeably to the requirements of an act to amend the mechanics’ lien law, (see chapter 64 of the Code of 1851,) approved January 29th, 1857, he filed in the office of the recorder and treasurer, of the county of Scott, a statement setting forth the kind of work done, the materials furnished, and the amount for which he claimed a mechanics’ lien, &c. On the same day he…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Hill v. Alliance Building Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1894
- Gilcrest v. GottschalkSupreme Court of Iowa · 1874
- Conlee v. ClarkIndiana Court of Appeals · 1896
- Evans v. TrippSupreme Court of Iowa · 1872
- Reynolds v. Manhattan Trust Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1897
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.