Legal Opinion

Heltzell v. Chicago & Alton Railroad

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided April 15, 1883PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal from Audrain Circuit Court. — Hon. G-. Porter, Judge. If all tbe materials are furnished under one contract, or one request, one indivisible lien will be created, but wben under several contracts or requests, each separate contract becomes a separate lien. It was a question of fact, to be submitted under proper instructions, whether there was only one contract or whether each load was a separate contract.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Audrain Circuit Court. — Hon. G-. Porter, Judge. If all tbe materials are furnished under one contract, or one request, one indivisible lien will be created, but wben under several contracts or requests, each separate contract becomes a separate lien. It was a question of fact, to be submitted under proper instructions, whether there was only one contract or whether each load was a separate contract. Stine v. Austin, 9 Mo 554 ; Viti v. Dixon, 12 Mo. 482; Livermore v. Wright, 83 Mo. 31; Phillips Mee. Liens, §§ 324, 326 ; Merchard v. Cook, 4 G-reene (Iowa) 115; Diller v. Burger, 68…

1Opinion of the CourtHough, C. J.

The Kansas City, St. Louis & Chicago Railroad Company is the owner oí a railroad extending from Mexico, Missouri, to Kansas City, Missouri. The Chicago & Alton Railroad Company was the contractor for building'said road, and is now the lessee thereof; Moraghan, Sims & Co. were sub-contractors under the Chicago & Alton Railroad Company for building a portion of said road ; and this suit was brought against said sub-contractors, contractor and lessee, and owner, to recover the price of 460 barrels of cement sold by the plaintiffs to said Moraghan, Sims & Co. to be used in the construction oí…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Gerard B. Allen & Co. v. Frumet Mining & Smelting Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1881
  2. Livermore v. WrighSupreme Court of Missouri · 1862

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Darlington Lumber Co. v. HarrisMissouri Court of Appeals · 1904
  2. Williams v. DittenhoeferSupreme Court of Missouri · 1905
  3. Dalton v. St. Louis, Memphis & Southeastern Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1905
  4. Heltzell v. Chicago & Alton Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1886

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API