Hall v. O'Donnell

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Hall v. O'Donnell

3 Ky. Op. 495, 1869 Ky. LEXIS 493

DecidedSeptember 30, 1869

StatusPublished

This text of 3 Ky. Op. 495 (Hall v. O'Donnell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hall v. O'Donnell, 3 Ky. Op. 495, 1869 Ky. LEXIS 493 (Ky. Ct. App. 1869).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Robertson:

The mechanic’s lien asserted by the appellant as a sub-contractor is unavailing for want of the written notice required by the statute. And there is no proof of the alleged promise.

Nor does it sufficiently appear that after payments to the under[496]*496takers and. most of the subordinates, any surplus demandable for work or material remains unappropriated.

Carlisle & O’Hara, for appellant. Fisks, for appellee.

The $1,000 charged by the petition to have been a loan, must be adjudged to have been a payment. Positive testimony and intrinsic probability authorize no other conclusion.

Wherefore, the judgment dismissing the petition is affirmed.

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