Legal Opinion

Seibert v. Glasser Hosiery Co.

Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Berks County

Decided March 6, 1922No. 9Published

Rule to strike off mechanic’s claim. C. P. Berks Co., April T., 1921, No. 9, M. L. D.

1Opinion of the Court

WAGNER, J.,

The plaintiffs filed a mechanic’s lien against the defendant’s property for the sum of $3029.10. The defendant asks that it be stricken off for two reasons. The first reason is that the claim is defective upon its face, in that it affirmatively appears therein that the principal item of the claim is for the furnishing and installing of a certain Webster vacuum system of steam heating, and that said system was installed by the said claimant under a certain conditional sales agreement bearing date of July 24, 1920, wherein and whereby the claimant retained title to the right of…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Chicago & Alton Railroad v. Union Rolling Mill Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1884
  2. Hooven, Owens & Rentschler, Co. v. John Featherstone's SonsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1901
  3. American Car & Foundry Co. v. Alexandria Water Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
  4. Jones v. ShawhanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1842
  5. Guckert v. HackeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893

18 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