York v. Barstow
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Petition, to enforce a mechanic’s lien, under Pub. Sts. c. 191. Trial in the Superior Court, without a jury, before Dewey, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions, in substance as follows. The petitioner, in September, 1897, made an oral contract with the respondent to do all the carpenter work on the respondent’s building.
Read the full summary
Petition, to enforce a mechanic’s lien, under Pub. Sts. c. 191. Trial in the Superior Court, without a jury, before Dewey, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions, in substance as follows. The petitioner, in September, 1897, made an oral contract with the respondent to do all the carpenter work on the respondent’s building. It was admitted that the petitioner duly performed his contract, and ceased to perform labor and furnish materials on January 24, 1898; and that he was entitled to maintain his lien, if the description of the property on which he seeks to enforce his lien is sufficiently…
1Opinion of the CourtHammond, J.
The judge sitting without a jury declined to rule that the description of the premises contained in the petitioner’s certificate was not sufficiently accurate for identification, and upon the evidence found for the petitioner.
It is manifest that the bill of exceptions does not recite all the evidence in the case; nor, although certain evidence material to the ruling requested is reported, does it appear that the bill contains all the evidence thus material. For aught that appears to the contrary, the judge may have been justified in finding upon the evidence that the stable was to be used for…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Commonwealth v. McIntoshMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1927
- McKin v. SiegelMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1926
- Handrahan v. North Main Street Garage, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1942
- Driscoll v. FloydMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914