Jenkin Contracting Co. v. Sixth Avenue & 57th Street Corp.
282 A.D. 662, 122 N.Y.S.2d 126, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4570
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 9, 1953·Published·Cited by 3 cases
Opinion
While the “consent” of the owner, which is the predicate of a lien in favor of a contractor under section 3 of the Lien Law, need not amount to a contractual relationship, we think that the trial court properly decided on the facts of this ease and that the owner had not given his “ consent ” within the requirement of the statute. Judgment, so far as appealed from, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present — Peek,
P. J., Glennon, Dore, Cohn and Breitel, JJ. [See post, p. 760.]
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Jenkin Contracting Co. v. Sixth Avenue & 57th Street Corp., 282 A.D. 662, 122 N.Y.S.2d 126, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4570 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1953).
282 A.D. 662 (Jenkin Contracting Co. v. Sixth Avenue & 57th Street Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Hartman v. Travis
81 A.D.2d 692 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1981)
Seaboard Pools, Inc. v. Freeman
46 Misc. 2d 508 (New York Supreme Court, 1965)
Forte v. Roc Hill Associates, Inc.
45 Misc. 2d 278 (New York Supreme Court, 1965)