Legal Opinion

McLellan v. Hamernick

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 28, 1962No. 38,662PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Knutson, Chief Justice.

This is an action to foreclose a number of mechanics liens.

To begin with there were other liens involved that have since been settled. Reduced to simple terms, the action as tried revolves around the following facts: Nathan and Beverly Elaine Simon were the owners of a house in St. Paul. On March 31, 1958, they engaged Ray Hamemick to construct an addition to the house for a total cost of $11,471.27. The contract contained the provision: “Job to be paid as work progresses and balance upon completion.” Hamemick sublet the plumbing work to Donald E. Becker, who was to…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Lundstrom Construction Co. v. DygertSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1959
  2. Abbott v. NashSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
  3. Home Supply Co. Inc. v. OstromSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
  4. Crane Co. v. Advance Plumbing & Heating Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1929
  5. Minneapolis Builders Supply Co. v. Calhoun Beach Club Holding Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1932

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Pierson v. SewellIdaho Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Gadtke v. Bren (In Re Bren)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Minnesota · 2002
  3. First Union National Bank v. RPB 2, LLCNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2004
  4. County of Ramsey v. StevensSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
  5. Mountain Stone Co. v. HW Hammond Co.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1977

6 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