National Supply & Construction Co. v. Fitch
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 62, April T., 1913, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Lawrence Co., Sept. T., 1909, No. 80, on verdict for plaintiff in case of National Supply & Construction Company v. M. Jennie Fitch, owner or reputed owner, and James Hood, contractor. Scire facias sur mechanic’s lien.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 62, April T., 1913, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Lawrence Co., Sept. T., 1909, No. 80, on verdict for plaintiff in case of National Supply & Construction Company v. M. Jennie Fitch, owner or reputed owner, and James Hood, contractor. Scire facias sur mechanic’s lien. Before Porter, P. J. From the record it appeared that the National Supply and Construction Company entered into a contract with James Hood to furnish material for a building to be constructed on land owned by M. Jennie Fitch. The building contract was made by C. E. Fitch, defendant’s husband, in his own name…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Henderson, J.,
The plaintiff was a subcontractor and furnished material used in the erection of the defendant’s house. The principal question in the case is, was the preliminary notice of the intention to file a lien, given to the husband of the defendant, sufficient to charge the latter. The contract was in the name of the husband and the plans and specifications exhibited to the plaintiff as a basis for its bid on the material desired were also in the name of the husband. The evidence shows that Mr. Fitch had charge of the business for his wife and acted for her in procuring the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Willson v. CanevinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
- Miller v. FitzSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
3Cited by1 opinion
- Guistra Development Co., Inc. v. LeeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1993