Hall v. Kjer

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Hall v. Kjer

47 N.J.L. 340, 1885 N.J. LEXIS 12

CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey

DecidedJune 15, 1885

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 47 N.J.L. 340 (Hall v. Kjer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hall v. Kjer, 47 N.J.L. 340, 1885 N.J. LEXIS 12 (N.J. 1885).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Ti-ie Chancellor.

The judgment which is brought up in this ease was entered in the Circuit Court of the county of Middlesex, in a suit upon the lien claim of a material man under the mechanics’ lien law, for materials furnished for a house built by the defendant Kjer upon a lot of land of the defendant Acken pursuant to a contract between them. The latter [341]*341pleaded that the house and land were not liable for the debt. He was a minor when the house was built. He, therefore, could make no contract for its erection which would be binding upon him or his property. There can be no lien upon the land of a minor under the mechanics’ lien law; for the lien given thereby is, except in the case of the land of married women, as to which there is an express provision for lien, incident only to a legal liability to pay which a minor is not competent to incur for building upon his land. Phil. Mech. Liens, §§ 108, 112; Johnson v. Parker, 3 Dutcher 239. The judgment of the court below should be affirmed.

For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Depue, Dixon, Mag-ie, Parker, Eeed, Yan Syokel, Brown, Clement, Cole, Paterson, Whitaker. 13.

For reversal — None.

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

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Ti-ie Chancellor.

The judgment which is brought up in this ease was entered in the Circuit Court of the county of Middlesex, in a suit upon the lien claim of a material man under the mechanics’ lien law, for materials furnished for a house built by the defendant Kjer upon a lot of land of the defendant Acken pursuant to a contract between them. The latter [341]*341pleaded that the house and land were not liable for the debt. He was a minor when the house was built. He, therefore, could make no contract for its erection which would be binding upon him or his property. There can be no lien upon the land of a minor under the mechanics’ lien law; for the lien given thereby is, except in the case of the land of married women, as to which there is an express provision for lien, incident only to a legal liability to pay which a minor is not competent to incur for building upon his land. Phil. Mech. Liens, §§ 108, 112; Johnson v. Parker, 3 Dutcher 239. The judgment of the court below should be affirmed.

For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Depue, Dixon, Mag-ie, Parker, Eeed, Yan Syokel, Brown, Clement, Cole, Paterson, Whitaker. 13.

For reversal — None.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

47 N.J.L. 340, 1885 N.J. LEXIS 12, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hall-v-kjer-nj-1885.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack