Legal Opinion

Deatherage v. Sheidley

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided June 13, 1892PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Appeal from the Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. Jambs. Gibson, Judge. (1) The defendant Sheidley’s demurrer to the evidence should have been sustained. The statute gives a lien on leasehold estates for buildings and improvements made thereon by the lessee. R. S. 1889, sec. 6707. But the words “building” and “improvement,” as used in that section, are synonymous.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. Jambs. Gibson, Judge. (1) The defendant Sheidley’s demurrer to the evidence should have been sustained. The statute gives a lien on leasehold estates for buildings and improvements made thereon by the lessee. R. S. 1889, sec. 6707. But the words “building” and “improvement,” as used in that section, are synonymous. Collins v. Mott, 45 Mo. 100; 'Richardson v. Koch, 81 Mo. 264. The improvement or building must be an independent structure. Dugan v. Scott, 37 Mo. App. 662. (2) The court, as shown by the declaration of law given by it of its own…

1Opinion of the CourtEllison, J.

— This action was instituted to enforce a mechanics’ lien, and the following is a sufficient statement of the principal facts upon which it is founded:

Defendant Sheidley was the owner of a lot fronting on Main street in Kansas ■ City, upon which there was a • two-story brick building, which was rented by a month to month tenancy to E. W. Hauser. On March 1, 1890, Sheidley and Hauser entered into a lease agreement whereby Sheidley leased the property to Hauser for two years and eleven months at an increased rate of rent, and with the agreement that Hauser was to erect •a one-story building in…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Ombony v. . JonesNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
  2. Bauer v. CabanneSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
  3. Ambrose Manufacturing Co. v. GapenMissouri Court of Appeals · 1886
  4. Murdock v. HillyerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1891
  5. Squires v. Fithian's AdministratorSupreme Court of Missouri · 1858

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. McClintic-Marshall Co. v. Ford Motor Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1931
  2. Brentwood Glass Company, Inc. v. Pal's Glass Service, Inc., Clayco, Inc., Cornerstone VI, LLC, St. Louis County, National City Bank of the Midwest, N.A., Paul M. Macon, UMB Bank, N.A., and Victor ZarilliSupreme Court of Missouri · 2016
  3. McDonnell v. NicholsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1896
  4. Seidel v. BloeserMissouri Court of Appeals · 1898
  5. Orear v. Dierks Lumber Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1915

4 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