Poole v. Fellows

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Poole v. Fellows

54 A. 772, 25 R.I. 64, 1903 R.I. LEXIS 8

DecidedMarch 16, 1903

StatusPublished

This text of 54 A. 772 (Poole v. Fellows) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Poole v. Fellows, 54 A. 772, 25 R.I. 64, 1903 R.I. LEXIS 8 (R.I. 1903).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

(1) We think the word “owner” in section 5 of chapter 206 of the General Laws, in the phrase “ owner of the property to be affected by the lien,” meansdhe owner of the fee when the fee in land is to be affected, and the owner of a leasehold or less interest when such less interest is to be affected. In this case the purchaser of the materials was a lessee, and 'his term, not the reversion belonging to his landlord, was the property to be affected. Of this property he was the owner, and, ‘ as he was likewise ¿he .purchaser of the materials, no notice to him was required. As no such notice was required, no “ copy of said notice” was required to be recorded.

(2) The objection that part of the land lies in the town of Johnston and no "notice was filed in that town, we understand to mean' that the account for which the lien is claimed was not filed in Johnston. This omission waives the petitioner’s right to a lien upon so much of the land as lies in that town, but is not effective as a' ground of demurrer to the petition. '

Demurrer overruled.

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

Per Curiam.

(1) We think the word “owner” in section 5 of chapter 206 of the General Laws, in the phrase “ owner of the property to be affected by the lien,” meansdhe owner of the fee when the fee in land is to be affected, and the owner of a leasehold or less interest when such less interest is to be affected. In this case the purchaser of the materials was a lessee, and 'his term, not the reversion belonging to his landlord, was the property to be affected. Of this property he was the owner, and, ‘ as he was likewise ¿he .purchaser of the materials, no notice to him was required. As no such notice was required, no “ copy of said notice” was required to be recorded.

(2) The objection that part of the land lies in the town of Johnston and no "notice was filed in that town, we understand to mean' that the account for which the lien is claimed was not filed in Johnston. This omission waives the petitioner’s right to a lien upon so much of the land as lies in that town, but is not effective as a' ground of demurrer to the petition. '

Demurrer overruled.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

54 A. 772, 25 R.I. 64, 1903 R.I. LEXIS 8, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/poole-v-fellows-ri-1903.