Holden v. Winslow
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Common Pleas of Hlh county. This was a scire facias on a mechanic’s lien issued in favor of Edmund Holden against E. C. Winslow, with notice to H. Thayer and C. A. Winslow, terre tenants. The material question in the case was whether the claim was filed in proper time. Holden, the plaintiff about the 1st April, 1847, contracted with E. O. Winslow to erect a saw-mill.
Read the full summary
Error to the Common Pleas of Hlh county. This was a scire facias on a mechanic’s lien issued in favor of Edmund Holden against E. C. Winslow, with notice to H. Thayer and C. A. Winslow, terre tenants. The material question in the case was whether the claim was filed in proper time. Holden, the plaintiff about the 1st April, 1847, contracted with E. O. Winslow to erect a saw-mill. The work was commenced in the spring of 1847. The work was continued till May or June, 1848, when the plaintiff left the work. It was alleged on his part, that he left for want of materials necessary to complete the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered, by
Coulter, J.
This judgment is reversed. The Court took the case from the jury by positive and binding direction, when the issue turned on matter of fact, about which there was evidence on both sides.
Whether the last work done by the mechanic was part and parcel of the original job or not, depended upon evidence, and upon the finding of that fact the lien depended. It was useless to discourse to us about the different kinds of wheels and machinery in a saw-mill, and the different modes of construction; and whether one kind of a mill might be considered…
2Cited by4 opinions
- National Surety Co. v. PriceCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1915
- Hill v. CallahanSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1878
- Day v. Pennsylvania RailroadSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
- Johnson v. Walker, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lawrence County1962