N. Meistrell & Co. v. Reach
Missouri Court of Appeals
JSrror to Cooper Circuit Court. — Hon. D. W. Shackleeobd, Judge. The plaintiffs were not entitled, under our statute, to a mechanic’s lien upon the pump, boiler, engine and machinery. Richardson v. Koch, 81 Mo. 264; Graves v. Fierce, 53 Mo. 423; Collins v. Mott, 45 Mo. 100. (1) The demurrer was properly overruled.
Read the full summary
JSrror to Cooper Circuit Court. — Hon. D. W. Shackleeobd, Judge. The plaintiffs were not entitled, under our statute, to a mechanic’s lien upon the pump, boiler, engine and machinery. Richardson v. Koch, 81 Mo. 264; Graves v. Fierce, 53 Mo. 423; Collins v. Mott, 45 Mo. 100. (1) The demurrer was properly overruled. The facts in this case, as shown by the averments of the petition, are very different from the case of Richardson-v. Koch, 81 Mo. 264. (2) Plaintiffs in error contend,, that for the reason there is no building, there can be-no lien under the statute. We urge this to be a…
1Opinion of the CourtGill, J.
— The sole question in this case is, whether or not a mechanic’s lien can be enforced against. a, pump, boiler, engine and other machinery and the land on which the same were used — the plaintiffs having-contributed certain labor and material in repairing such machinery. The said boiler, pump, engine and machinery were not situated in, or in any way connected with, any building or improvement, but were simply-placed and used at a mining shaft in drawing therefrom coal and water. The trial court held the plaintiffs entitled to a mechanic’s lien and defendants bring the-case here by writ of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Richardson v. KochSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- Graves v. PierceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1873
- Collins v. MottSupreme Court of Missouri · 1869
3Cited by2 opinions
- Gilbert Hunt Co v. ParryWashington Supreme Court · 1910
- Ottumwa Iron Works v. MuirMissouri Court of Appeals · 1907