Baldwin v. Spear Bros.
Supreme Court of Vermont
Appeal in Chancery, Chittenden County. Heard at Chambers January 20, 1905, on bill, answer, and master’s report, Hcuselton, Chancellor. Decree, “That the expenses of the receivership be first paid out of the funds in the hands of the receiver, and that the balance in his hands be distributed, pro rata, among all the creditors of the Hygiene Company.” Spear Bros, appealed. The opinion fully states the case.
Read the full summary
Appeal in Chancery, Chittenden County. Heard at Chambers January 20, 1905, on bill, answer, and master’s report, Hcuselton, Chancellor. Decree, “That the expenses of the receivership be first paid out of the funds in the hands of the receiver, and that the balance in his hands be distributed, pro rata, among all the creditors of the Hygiene Company.” Spear Bros, appealed. The opinion fully states the case. Spear Brothers have no rights under V. S. 2273, unless they have strictly complied with its requirements. Piper v. Ployt, 61 Yt. 539; McIntosh v. Schroeder, 154 111. 520; Fhdin v. Murphy,…
1Opinion of the CourtPowers, J.
This is a bill in chancery brought by the receiver of the Hygiene Milk Company to test the validity of a mechanic’s lien asserted by the defendant Spear Bros, on certain premises formerly owned by the Milk Company in the city of Burlington. On or about September 15, 1901, Spear Bros., who were contracters and builders, entered into a written contract with the Milk Company, a corporation, to furnish the materials and erect for the Company on its lot on St. Paul St., a brick block for a specified sum, payable at the completion of the work. Pursuant to that contract, the firm erected the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Cook v. Rome Brick Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1893
- Premier Steel Co. v. McElwaine-Richards Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1896
- Cannon & Dounce v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1890
- Piper v. HoytSupreme Court of Vermont · 1889
- Doane v. ClintonUtah Supreme Court · 1880
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Clifford v. West Hartford Creamery Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1931
- American Clay MacHinery Co. v. New England Brick Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1913
- Glinka v. Hinesburg Sand & Gravel, Inc. (In Re APC Construction, Inc.)District Court, D. Vermont · 1991
- Goodro v. TarkeySupreme Court of Vermont · 1941
- Town of Colchester v. Hinesburg Sand & Gravel, Inc. (In Re APC Construction, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Vermont · 1990
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.