Western Sash & Door Co. v. Buckner
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. E. L. Scarritt, Judge., (1) If there is any such thing as selling materials under such circumstances that the plaintiff, while knowing what building they are to be used in, can not claim a lien, then this is that sort of case. Buckner, the lumber dealer, was merely a materialman and not a subcontractor within the meaning of the Missouri statute.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. E. L. Scarritt, Judge., (1) If there is any such thing as selling materials under such circumstances that the plaintiff, while knowing what building they are to be used in, can not claim a lien, then this is that sort of case. Buckner, the lumber dealer, was merely a materialman and not a subcontractor within the meaning of the Missouri statute. We submit that the mere fact that in the Missouri decisions a materialman who sells to a contractor is often spoken of as a subcontractor, has no bearing oh this case for the reason that the question here…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, P. J.
This is an action to enforce a mechanics’ lien; and in which the plaintiff had judgment and defendants appealed.
*98Statement. The case is something like this: Billings, the owner of a lot in Kansas City, entered into a contract with Gfordy & Son to perform all the labor and furnish all the material for the building of a house on said'lot. The contractors, Qordy & Son, entered into a further contract with Buckner to furnish all the lumber and mill work, which was required for the building. Buckner, under his subcontract with Qordy & Son, furnished the lumber, but the mill work, consisting of…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- De Witt v. SmithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1876
- Ranson v. SheehanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- Oster v. RabeneauSupreme Court of Missouri · 1870
- McAdow v. SturtevantMissouri Court of Appeals · 1890
- Ambrose Manufacturing Co. v. GapenMissouri Court of Appeals · 1886
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- City of St. Louis ex rel. Contracting & Supply Co. v. Hill-O'Meara Construction Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1913
- Riverside Lumber Co. v. SchmidtMissouri Court of Appeals · 1908
- Salt Lake Hardware Co. v. Chainman Mining & Electric Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Nevada · 1904