Quin v. McOliff

New York Court of Common Pleas

Quin v. McOliff

1 Abb. Pr. 322

DecidedFebruary 15, 1855

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Abb. Pr. 322 (Quin v. McOliff) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Common Pleas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Quin v. McOliff, 1 Abb. Pr. 322 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1855).

Pincite

Opinion

Daly, J.

(Orally). The corporation being the owner and Oliff the contractor, it ought to appear by the complaint that the work was performed and the materials were furnished by the plaintiff to McOliff, in conformity with the terms of the contract made by McOliff, with the owner, the corporation. This was essential to the right of lien. The complaint contains no such averment, nor does that fact appear even by the notice filed with the county clerk. Ho right of action was •shown by the complaint, and no injunction can be granted.

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

Daly, J.

(Orally). The corporation being the owner and Oliff the contractor, it ought to appear by the complaint that the work was performed and the materials were furnished by the plaintiff to McOliff, in conformity with the terms of the contract made by McOliff, with the owner, the corporation. This was essential to the right of lien. The complaint contains no such averment, nor does that fact appear even by the notice filed with the county clerk. Ho right of action was •shown by the complaint, and no injunction can be granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Abb. Pr. 322, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/quin-v-mcoliff-nyctcompl-1855.