Heamann v. Porter
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Land Court. The instructions Nos. 1 and 2, asked by defendants and refused, ought to have been given, because the lien law of 1857, applicable to St. Louis county, sec. 8, provides that the claimant shall file a just and true account, after all just credits have been given to which the debtor is entitled, and shall do this under oath.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Land Court. The instructions Nos. 1 and 2, asked by defendants and refused, ought to have been given, because the lien law of 1857, applicable to St. Louis county, sec. 8, provides that the claimant shall file a just and true account, after all just credits have been given to which the debtor is entitled, and shall do this under oath. The verdict of the jury, which was justified by the evi- . donee, shows that in their opinion the plaintiff did not file a true account; for the verdict, deducting interest, is for about one hundred dollars less than the balance claimed by…
1Opinion of the CourtDryden, Judge
This was a suit under the Mechanics’ Lien Law, specially applicable to St. Louis county, (Session Laws of 1857, p. 668,) to enforce a lien against a house and lot in the city of St. Louis, for brick sold and delivered by the respondent to the defendant Busch, as sub-contractor, and used by him in the construction of the house. The amount claimed was $727. 14, being a balance after deducting a credit of $47.06. The petition is in the usual form, containing the averments, among others, that the respondent had in proper time filed with the clerk of the St. Louis Land Court “a just and true…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Hoffman v. HynesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1865