Pool v. Wedemeyer & Schulte
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Galveston. Tried below before the Hon. Wm. H. Stewart. John H. Sandford brought suit on the 21st of May, 1814, against Win.
Read the full summary
Error from Galveston. Tried below before the Hon. Wm. H. Stewart. John H. Sandford brought suit on the 21st of May, 1814, against Win. Pool, to recover $6,000, alleged to be due him as the contract price agreed to be paid him for supplying all material and doing all work in the construction and completion of a dwelling house for said Pool on lots 5, 6 and 1, in block 264, in Galveston, and also for “extra” work thereon the sum of $1,951.50. He claimed “that the work and material furnished by him in his business as a mechanic gave him a lien upon the dwelling and lots.” On the 2d of April,…
1Opinion of the Court
Stayton, Associate Justice.—
The question of the sufficiency of the petition of intervention of Wedemeyer & Schulte was involved in the decision of this cause when before this court upon former appeal, and it was then decided, that while it did not show that Sandford was entitled to a mechanic’s lien, yet that the same was sufficient if sustained by evidence to give them a lien as against Pool as principal contractors; and we now see no sufficient reason to authorize us to come to a contrary conclusion.
It is claimed that the court erred in establishing a lien in favor of Wedemeyer & Schulte.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- League & Lufkin v. DavisTexas Supreme Court · 1880
- Erhard v. CallaghanTexas Supreme Court · 1870
3Cited by26 opinions
- International Harvester Co. of America v. CampbellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1906
- Taylor v. NetherwoodSupreme Court of Virginia · 1895
- Memphis Cotton Oil Co. v. TolbertCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1914
- Laughter v. SeelaTexas Supreme Court · 1883
- Harris v. HarrisColorado Court of Appeals · 1897
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.