Knabb's Appeal
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
From the Common Pleas of Montgomery. March 26. The questions in this case arose on the distribution of the proceeds of a sheriff’s sale of land. The funds were awarded to certain mechanics’ liens, and the objections were taken by a judgment-creditor. To the claim of Bean & Ullman, the objections were — 1st. That the name of the owner was not set forth in the. claim. It was entitled against Joseph M. Harper, and the bill annexed was in that name.
Read the full summary
From the Common Pleas of Montgomery. March 26. The questions in this case arose on the distribution of the proceeds of a sheriff’s sale of land. The funds were awarded to certain mechanics’ liens, and the objections were taken by a judgment-creditor. To the claim of Bean & Ullman, the objections were — 1st. That the name of the owner was not set forth in the. claim. It was entitled against Joseph M. Harper, and the bill annexed was in that name. The objection was, that, in the body of the claim, the name was stated as Joseph Harper. 2d. That it did not appear whether the parties claimed as…
1Opinion of the CourtBelu, J.
The formal objections to the statements of the claims in question are made under the 12th section of the act of 1836. The great object of its several provisions is notice, and it has been truly said, an observance of them is essential to the safety of owners, purchasers, and other lien-creditors, as furnishing some data by which, in case of dispute, they may be enabled to ascertain the truth: Noll v. Swineford, 6 Barr, 187. But all the cases agree that a substantial compliance is sufficient, and this is shown to exist wherever enough appeal's, on the face of the statement, to point the way to…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Hauer's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1843
- Witman v. WalkerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1844
- Sullivan v. JohnsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1840
- Thomas v. JamesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1844
- Springer v. KeyserSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1841
3Cited by12 opinions
- Clemleddy Construction, Inc. v. YorstonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
- Tesauro v. BAIRDSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- American Car & Foundry Co. v. Alexandria Water Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
- Denlinger, Inc. v. AgrestaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
- Regency Investments, Inc. v. Inlander Ltd.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.