Cannon & Dounce v. Williams
Supreme Court of Colorado
Appeal from, District Court of Douglas County. Suit was begun by one George O. Bates against James Cannon, Jr., William J. Dounce, Morgan D. Williams and others to establish his claim for services rendered as an attorney, and to secure a prior lien upon certain coal mines as to which two of the defendants were considered owners and the others lien-claimants.
Read the full summary
Appeal from, District Court of Douglas County. Suit was begun by one George O. Bates against James Cannon, Jr., William J. Dounce, Morgan D. Williams and others to establish his claim for services rendered as an attorney, and to secure a prior lien upon certain coal mines as to which two of the defendants were considered owners and the others lien-claimants. Williams filed an answer and cross-complaint, alleging the performance of labor upon the mining property, the non-payment of compensation therefor, and a compliance with the mechanic’s-lien law then in force. He asked judgment for…
1DissentJustice Hatt
I concur with that portion of the foregoing opinion in which it is held that the mechanic’s lien cannot be maintained, but dissent from the views expressed upon the other branch of the case. In my judgment, upon the failure of the appellee to establish a lien, the entire proceedings should have been dismissed. This rule has been repeatedly announced by this court, and ought not to be now departed from unless changed by positive legislative enactment. Jensen v. Brown, 2 Colo. 694; Barnard, Adm’r, v. McKenzie, 4 *27Colo. 251; Hart et al. v. Mullen, 4 Colo. 512; Mining Co. v. Finch, 6 Colo. 214;…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Barnard v. McKenzieSupreme Court of Colorado · 1878
- San Juan & St. Louis Mining & Smelting Co. v. FinchSupreme Court of Colorado · 1882
- Greeley, S. L. & P. R. v. HarrisSupreme Court of Colorado · 1888
- Jensen v. BrownSupreme Court of Colorado · 1875
- Hart & Schlessenger Corp. v. MullenSupreme Court of Colorado · 1878