Legal Opinion

Cleverly v. Moseley

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided January 3, 1889PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Petition under the Pub. Sts. c. 191, to enforce a mechanic’s lien for labor performed in the erection of a house on a lot of land in Boston, owned by the respondent. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Sherman, J., the only question was as to the sufficiency of the description of the property intended to be covered by the lien in the statement filed by the petitioner in the registry of deeds.

Read the full summary

Petition under the Pub. Sts. c. 191, to enforce a mechanic’s lien for labor performed in the erection of a house on a lot of land in Boston, owned by the respondent. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Sherman, J., the only question was as to the sufficiency of the description of the property intended to be covered by the lien in the statement filed by the petitioner in the registry of deeds. This statement, which was introduced in evidence by the petitioner, after reciting that the labor was performed in the erection of a building situated on a lot of land in Boston, proceeded: “…

1Opinion of the CourtKnowlton, J.

The only question in this case is whether the description of property in the petitioner’s statement, filed in the registry of deeds, was sufficient to answer the requirements of the statute. Such a description should be “ sufficiently accurate for identification.” ' Pub. Sts. c. 191, § 6. But § 8 of the same chapter provides, that “ the validity of the lien shall not be affected by any inaccuracy in the statement relating to the property to be covered by it, if such property can be reasonably recognized from the description.”

In the case at bar, the name of the owner was' given only according…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. McPhee v. LitchfieldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1888

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Willamette Steam Mills Co. v. KremerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Dodge v. HallMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1897
  3. Planing Mill Co. v. Roman Cath. BishopCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
  4. Driscoll v. FloydMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
  5. Richards v. Lewisohn Bros.Montana Supreme Court · 1897

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

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

Powered by the Exa API