Legal Opinion

Royal Lumber Co. v. Hoelzner

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided December 11, 1924PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Preston, J.- —

1. The matters before referred to are not in dispute. There are some other matters about which there is no dispute. There is no dispute as to the amount due plaintiff on the account, or as to the filing of the mechanics’ lien ‘ statement within the statutory-time. The material for the hog house was purchased from plaintiff by the defendant Peter Hoelzner, and charged to him individually. The building was built for the immediate use and benefit of the defendant Peter. Mrs. Hoelzner testifies that she makes no claim to the building, and never has; that she has always considered it…

2Cases cited39 opinions

  1. Getchell & Martin Lumber & Manufacturing Co. v. Peterson & SampsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1904
  2. Copeland v. Kehoe & RamseySupreme Court of Alabama · 1880
  3. Wadsworth v. HodgeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1889
  4. Neilson v. Iowa Eastern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1876
  5. Getchell v. AllenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1872

34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Schoeneman Lumber Co. v. DavisSupreme Court of Iowa · 1925
  2. Society Linnea v. WilboisSupreme Court of Iowa · 1962
  3. Joyce Lumber Co. v. WickSupreme Court of Iowa · 1925
  4. Ellis v. SimpsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1925
  5. Lincoln National Life Insurance v. McSpaddenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1930

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