Legal Opinion

G. Edgar Harr Sons v. Newton

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided November 19, 1959No. [No. 38, September Term, 1959.]PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHenderson, J.

This appeal raises a narrow question as to the sufficiency of a notice of intention to file a mechanic’s lien. The suit was instituted as a special case by consent under Maryland Rule 329. Pursuant to Code (1957), Art. 63, sec. 29, a surety bond was substituted for the lien, and it was agreed that if the Court should find sufficient notice of intent to claim a lien, judgment might be entered against the surety, otherwise, that the lien claim should be dismissed.

It appears that the appellees, the Newtons, engaged Carrigan and Hester to erect a dwelling on their lot, which they acquired by deed…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Trustees of the German Lutheran Evangelical St. Matthew's Congregation v. HeiseCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1876
  2. District Heights Apartments v. Noland Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1998
  3. Parker v. Tilghman v. Morgan, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1936
  4. Treusch v. ShryockCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1879
  5. Bukowitz v. Maryland Lumber Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1956

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Himelfarb v. B & M Welding & Iron Works, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1969
  2. Bob Holding Corp. v. Normal Realty Corp.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1960
  3. Palmer Park Ltd. Partnership v. Marvelite, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1969
  4. Mt. Airy Plumbing & Heating, Inc. v. Grey Dawn Development Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1964
  5. Mimsco Steel Corp. v. Holloway Concrete Construction Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1971

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

Powered by the Exa API