Cambridge Tile Manufacturing Co. v. Germania Bank

Supreme Court of Georgia

Cambridge Tile Manufacturing Co. v. Germania Bank

57 S.E. 311, 128 Ga. 178, 1907 Ga. LEXIS 59

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedApril 13, 1907

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 57 S.E. 311 (Cambridge Tile Manufacturing Co. v. Germania Bank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cambridge Tile Manufacturing Co. v. Germania Bank, 57 S.E. 311, 128 Ga. 178, 1907 Ga. LEXIS 59 (Ga. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

Cobb, P. J.

This was an action by a materialman, who had furnished material for the improvement of real estate to a subcontractor who had no contractual relation with the owner of the real estate, to foreclose a lien upon such real estate. The petition was [179]*179dismissed, upon demurrer. The case is controlled by the ruling in General Supply Co. v. Hunn, 126 Ga. 615. The case of Heard v. Holmes, 113 Ga. 159, was overruled in the case just cited. The case of Allen v. Schweigert, 110 Ga. 323, and 113 Ga. 69, did not involve the question as to the right to a lien by a materialman furnishing material to a subcontractor. The materialman in th'at ease was one who had furnished material to a contractor.

Judgment affirmed.

Fish, G. J., absent. The other Justices concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cobb, P. J.

This was an action by a materialman, who had furnished material for the improvement of real estate to a subcontractor who had no contractual relation with the owner of the real estate, to foreclose a lien upon such real estate. The petition was [179]*179dismissed, upon demurrer. The case is controlled by the ruling in General Supply Co. v. Hunn, 126 Ga. 615. The case of Heard v. Holmes, 113 Ga. 159, was overruled in the case just cited. The case of Allen v. Schweigert, 110 Ga. 323, and 113 Ga. 69, did not involve the question as to the right to a lien by a materialman furnishing material to a subcontractor. The materialman in th'at ease was one who had furnished material to a contractor.

Judgment affirmed.

Fish, G. J., absent. The other Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 S.E. 311, 128 Ga. 178, 1907 Ga. LEXIS 59, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cambridge-tile-manufacturing-co-v-germania-bank-ga-1907.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack