Arlt v. Whitlock
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal oy the plaintiff, Henry Arlt, from an interlocutory judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the defendant, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Hew York on the 29th day of April, 1901, upon the decision of the court rendered after a trial at the Hew York Special Term sustaining the demurrer interposed by the defendant to the second cause of action alleged in the complaint.
1Opinion of the Court
Laughlin, J.:
The ground of the demurrer is that facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action are not stated in the plaintiff’s second cause of action. The principal cause of action is for the foreclosure of a mechanic’s lien for work, labor and services performed in the alteration of a ffve-story apartment building at Hos. 135 and 137 Horfolk street, pursuant to a written contract with the owner. Article 7 of the contract provides that the work shall be sufficiently completed to make the apartments ready for occupancy within six weeks and wholly completed within ten weeks from the date…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Wood v. . AmoryNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Rider v. . PowellNew York Court of Appeals · 1863
- Woolsey v. SunderlandAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1900
- Consolidated Electric Storage Co. v. Atlantic Trust Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
3Cited by3 opinions
- National Gum & Mica Co. v. MacCormackAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908
- Friedman Marble & Slate Works, Inc. v. WhitcombAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1919
- Surlak v. SurlakAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983