Legal Opinion

Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. v. Vanderbilt

New York Supreme Court

Decided June 26, 1911PublishedCited by 2 opinions

_ Action by the Pittsburgh Plate Glass Company against one Vanderbilt and others for the foreclosure of a mechanic’s lien. Rights of parties determined, and decree of foreclosure rendered.

1Opinion of the CourtHendrick, J.

In this action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien, defendants Vanderbilt, the owner, and Jacob & Youngs, Incorporated, the contractor, have no pecuniary interest. The liens have been transferred from the property to the bond given by defendant National Surety Company. Defendants A. P. Bigelow & Co. and the Russell & Erwin Company did not appear at the trial. Defendant Relyea, trustee in bankruptcy of subcontractor Maher, may also be ignored. We have left the plaintiff and four other lienors and a fund of about $9,000 still in the hands of the contractors. That fund must be distributed among these…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Davidsburgh v. . Knickerbocker Life Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1882
  2. Herrmann & Grace v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1909
  3. Toop v. . SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1905
  4. Herrmann Grace v. . the City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1910
  5. Aeschlimann v. . Presbyterian HospitalNew York Court of Appeals · 1901

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Farabella v. PorterNew York Supreme Court · 1927
  2. American Metal Ceiling Co. v. New Hyde Park Fire DistrictAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1916

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

Powered by the Exa API