Lietka v. HAMBERSKY
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion bv
Hirt, J.,
In the performance of a contract between the parties, plaintiff had installed plumbing and plumbing fixtures in a new house then in the course of construction on the land of the defendant, Eugene Hambersky. He contracted directly with Hambersky and was not a subcontractor. On August 13, 1918, plaintiff filed a mechanic’s lien against Hambersky’s land in the sum of $1,141.18, alleged to be the amount due and unpaid after full performance of his contract. The validity of the lien was not questioned on technical or other grounds. A writ of scire facias issued and thereafter…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Arzinger v. BaughmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
- Hopkins Manufacturing Co. v. KettererSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
- Pontius v. NesbitSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1861
- Stofflett v. KressSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
- Jordan's PetitionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Universal Builders Supply, Inc. v. Shaler Highlands Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
- Grant v. De OtteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- Cherry v. Empire Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
- Philip Morris Inc. v. Pittsburgh Penguins, Inc.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1983
- Cluett, Peabody & Co. v. Campbell, Rea, Hayes & LargeDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1980
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.