Legal Opinion

Kahle v. McClary

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided April 24, 1959No. 37,677PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Matson, Justice.

In an action to foreclose a mechanics lien, defendant First Federal Savings and Loan Association appeals from an order denying its motion for a new trial.

The facts are as follows: Prior to August 9, 1955, defendants W. R. McClary and Esther McClary, his wife, (herein referred to as McClarys) decided to convert their one-family dwelling into a duplex. Plaintiff, a heating and plumbing contractor, entered into a verbal agreement with McClarys to make the necessary changes in the heating system. Payment was to be made on a quantum meruit basis. On August 9, 1955, the work began.…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Frankoviz v. SmithSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
  2. American Bridge Co. v. HonstainSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
  3. Fitzpatrick v. ErnstSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
  4. Paine & Nixon Co. v. DahlvickSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1917
  5. Coughlan v. LonginiSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1899

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Amtech Lighting Services Co. v. Payless Cashways (In Re Payless Cashways, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Eighth Circuit · 1999
  2. Hayle Floor Covering, Inc. v. First Minnesota Construction Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
  3. New Prague Lumber & Readi-Mix Co. v. BastyrSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1962
  4. Albert and Harlow Inc. v. Great Northern Oil Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1969
  5. Rochester's Suburban Lumber Company v. SlocumbSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1968

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API