Isler v. Dixon.

53 S.E. 348, 140 N.C. 529, 1906 N.C. LEXIS 39
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedMarch 13, 1906
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 53 S.E. 348 (Isler v. Dixon.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Isler v. Dixon., 53 S.E. 348, 140 N.C. 529, 1906 N.C. LEXIS 39 (N.C. 1906).

Opinion

Clark, C. J.

There is only one exception that requires consideration. The plaintiff erected gutters, down spouts, outlets, etc., for the appellant’s house and duly filed his lien. The building of the gutters, down spouts, outlets, etc., and furnishing the material were all in the same contract, which was entire and indivisible. The contractor is entitled to a lien for the whole amount under the “mechanic’s and laborer’s lien law.” Revisal, section 2016. Broyhill v. Gaither, 119 N. C., 443, is exactly “on all fours.”

The appellant contended that the words in the “bill of particulars” in filing the lien “158 feet gutter at 38c,” “283 feet gutter at 20c,” etc., showed that the lien was only for material furnished, and hence that the defendant could claim his exemptions. But the “facts found” by the referee and approved by the judge show that the contract and lien were for the gutters, down spouts, outlets, etc., including *530 both work and material. The judgment is therefore superior to the homestead and personal property exemption. Const., Art. X, sec. 4.

No Error.

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

Related

Frank H. Conner Co. v. Spanish Inns Charlotte, Ltd.
242 S.E.2d 785 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
53 S.E. 348, 140 N.C. 529, 1906 N.C. LEXIS 39, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/isler-v-dixon-nc-1906.