Legal Opinion

Falk v. Nitz

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided October 2, 1922No. Docket No. 142PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtMcDonald, J.

The plaintiffs filed a bill to foreclose a mechanics’ lien on defendants’ premises for the sum of $472.51, which they claim is the balance due to them for work and labor performed and materials furnished in the construction of a two-family flat. The agreement was in writing,-and is as follows:

“Contract of Nitz Job, May 15, 1916.
“This is to certify that Mr. and Mrs. Hugo Nitz, *652the first party, and William H. Falk and Norman A. Witwer, the second party, have come to terms that the second party is to build a 2-family brick veneer flat, and move old house back and remodel and place a 16x22 cellar…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Eaton v. GladwellMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
  2. Gross v. CreytsMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
  3. Ginsberg v. MyersMichigan Supreme Court · 1921

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. De Haan v. CrumMichigan Supreme Court · 1924

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

Powered by the Exa API