Paladino Engineering Co. v. Contract No. 9107 Filed by Mahoney-Clarke, Inc.

New York Supreme Court

Paladino Engineering Co. v. Contract No. 9107 Filed by Mahoney-Clarke, Inc.

126 Misc. 873, 215 N.Y.S. 173, 1926 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 892

DecidedApril 11, 1926

StatusPublished

This text of 126 Misc. 873 (Paladino Engineering Co. v. Contract No. 9107 Filed by Mahoney-Clarke, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Paladino Engineering Co. v. Contract No. 9107 Filed by Mahoney-Clarke, Inc., 126 Misc. 873, 215 N.Y.S. 173, 1926 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 892 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

Faber, J.

I am of the opinion that this court is without power to grant this motion. The lien- is filed pursuant to sections 5 and 12 of the Lien Law (added by Laws of1911, chap. 873, as amd. by Laws of 1916, chap. 507), and section 21 (added by Laws of 1911, chap. 873, as amd. by Laws of 1914, chap. 266, and Laws of 1916, chap. 507) specifically provides the methods by which such a lien may be discharged, and nowhere in that section is this court empowered to entertain-a summary application for the discharge of a lien or to consider the validity of the claims embraced in such notice of lien. Questions similar to those presented here have already been passed upon adversely to the contentions of the moving party. (Matter of Ruderman, 179 N. Y. Supp. 452; Matter of Cohen, No. 1, 209 App. Div. 413; Matter of Rudiger, 118 id. 86.)

Motion must be denied.

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

Faber, J.

I am of the opinion that this court is without power to grant this motion. The lien- is filed pursuant to sections 5 and 12 of the Lien Law (added by Laws of1911, chap. 873, as amd. by Laws of 1916, chap. 507), and section 21 (added by Laws of 1911, chap. 873, as amd. by Laws of 1914, chap. 266, and Laws of 1916, chap. 507) specifically provides the methods by which such a lien may be discharged, and nowhere in that section is this court empowered to entertain-a summary application for the discharge of a lien or to consider the validity of the claims embraced in such notice of lien. Questions similar to those presented here have already been passed upon adversely to the contentions of the moving party. (Matter of Ruderman, 179 N. Y. Supp. 452; Matter of Cohen, No. 1, 209 App. Div. 413; Matter of Rudiger, 118 id. 86.)

Motion must be denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

126 Misc. 873, 215 N.Y.S. 173, 1926 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 892, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/paladino-engineering-co-v-contract-no-9107-filed-by-mahoney-clarke-inc-nysupct-1926.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack