McCloy v. Goldbloom

Alleghany County Court of Common Pleas

McCloy v. Goldbloom

2 Pa. D. & C. 428, 1922 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 304

CourtPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County

DecidedJune 1, 1922

DocketNo. 100

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Pa. D. & C. 428 (McCloy v. Goldbloom) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

McCloy v. Goldbloom, 2 Pa. D. & C. 428, 1922 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 304 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

Douglass, J.,

This case comes before us upon a rule to strike off a mechanic’s lien entered at the above number and term.

From the notice of the filing of the lien and from the lien'itself, it appears that a mechanic’s lien was filed against the property of the defendant, wherein it was specified that the nature of the labor or materials furnished was: “Electrical wiring and installation on the above mentioned premises at 5447 Woodmont Place.”

We are of opinion that this is not a sufficiently accurate description to permit this lien to stand, the rule of law under the act being that, at the filing of a mechanic’s lien, the description of the work done or materials furnished must be as accurate as the circumstances will permit. Clearly, in this case, a more complete detailed description of the materials furnished could have been made, and for this reason the lien must be stricken off, and, therefore, the rule should be made absolute.

Prom Edwin L. Mattern, Pittsbureh. P».

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

Douglass, J.,

This case comes before us upon a rule to strike off a mechanic’s lien entered at the above number and term.

From the notice of the filing of the lien and from the lien'itself, it appears that a mechanic’s lien was filed against the property of the defendant, wherein it was specified that the nature of the labor or materials furnished was: “Electrical wiring and installation on the above mentioned premises at 5447 Woodmont Place.”

We are of opinion that this is not a sufficiently accurate description to permit this lien to stand, the rule of law under the act being that, at the filing of a mechanic’s lien, the description of the work done or materials furnished must be as accurate as the circumstances will permit. Clearly, in this case, a more complete detailed description of the materials furnished could have been made, and for this reason the lien must be stricken off, and, therefore, the rule should be made absolute.

Prom Edwin L. Mattern, Pittsbureh. P».

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Pa. D. & C. 428, 1922 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 304, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccloy-v-goldbloom-pactcomplallegh-1922.