Cole v. Uhl
Supreme Court of Connecticut
. Petition for the foreclosure of a builders’ lien; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of New Haven County, and heard before Peels, J. Pacts found, a decree in favor of the petitioner passed, and a motion in error by the respondent. The case is fully stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtLoomis, J.
The Court of Common Pleas passed a decree in this case foreclosing a mechanics’ lien on land described in the petition, on account of a debt due for materials furnished and labor performed by the petitioner in the erection of a dwelling-house for the respondent on the land, under a written contract between the parties; and the respondent, *297by bis motion in error, seeks to reverse this decree, for two reasons:—1st, because the certificate of lien was not filed within the time required by law; and 2d, because the court received evidence to show that the petitioner ceased to furnish materials and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Flint v. RaymondSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1874
3Cited by15 opinions
- Milliken Bros., Incorporated v. . City of N.Y.New York Court of Appeals · 1911
- General Fire Extinguisher Co. v. Schwartz Bros. CommissionSupreme Court of Missouri · 1901
- Nichols v. CulverSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1883
- Coffey v. SmithOregon Supreme Court · 1908
- Schreck v. City of StamfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1999
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.