G. Edgar Harr Sons v. Newton
Court of Appeals of Maryland
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
- Trustees of the German Lutheran Evangelical St. Matthew's Congregation v. HeiseCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1876
- District Heights Apartments v. Noland Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1998
- Parker v. Tilghman v. Morgan, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1936
- Treusch v. ShryockCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1879
- Bukowitz v. Maryland Lumber Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1956
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Himelfarb v. B & M Welding & Iron Works, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1969
- Bob Holding Corp. v. Normal Realty Corp.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1960
- Palmer Park Ltd. Partnership v. Marvelite, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1969
- Mt. Airy Plumbing & Heating, Inc. v. Grey Dawn Development Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1964
- Mimsco Steel Corp. v. Holloway Concrete Construction Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1971