F. W. Wint Co. v. Snyder

Reno, P. J.,

There being no denial of those averments of the mechanic’s lien in which the sale and delivery of material by the sub-contractor to the contractor are set forth, it was proper to permit the lien to be read into evidence, and such reading dispenses with proof of the sales and deliveries: Ott v. Du Plan Silk Corp., 271 Pa. 322; Weaver v. Sheeler, 118 Pa. 634; Weitzel Lumber Co. v. Chenowith, 27 Dist. R. 864; Ronalds & Johnson Co. v. Kennedy, 25 Dist. R. 417.

Plaintiff did not file a replication to the affidavit of defence. Nor did defendants, who are the owners, rule plaintiff to…