Plurede v. Levasseur
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Exceptions by Dependants. The case appears in the opinion. In a suit against a foreign defendant in personam and in rem against the lumber attacked, in order to maintain tbe action or get a valid judgment against either, tbe defendant should appear in court, or be legally and properly summoned to appear in court, and the owners of tbe lumber attached should be properly and legally notified. In other words, tbe court should have jurisdiction over both.
Read the full summary
Exceptions by Dependants. The case appears in the opinion. In a suit against a foreign defendant in personam and in rem against the lumber attacked, in order to maintain tbe action or get a valid judgment against either, tbe defendant should appear in court, or be legally and properly summoned to appear in court, and the owners of tbe lumber attached should be properly and legally notified. In other words, tbe court should have jurisdiction over both. This contention is sustained by practice and precedent ever since the earliest statute was enacted, giving the lien. Other methods are provided…
1Opinion of the CourtWhitehouse, J.
This is an action of assumpsit brought under the statute to enforce a lien for the plaintiff’s personal services on certain railroad ties and cedar logs attached on the writ. The plaintiff did not perform the labor by virtue of a contract with the owner of the ties and logs, but while in the employment of the defendant, who was in charge of the undertaking as a contractor.
It is provided by section thirty-eight of chapter ninety-one R. S., that: “whoever labors at cutting, hauling, rafting or driving logs or lumber, .... has a lien thereon for the amount due for his personal services, and the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Boswell's Lessee v. OtisSupreme Court of the United States · 1850
- Streeter v. McMillanMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
- Reilly v. StephensonMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
3Cited by1 opinion
- Stanley v. StanleySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1970