Seay v. Laurel Plumbing & Metal Co.

71 So. 9, 110 Miss. 834
Mississippi Supreme Court·Decided March 15, 1916·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Sykes, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The .Laurel Plumbing & Metal Company, a corporation,, brought this suit in the circuit court of the second district,, of Jones county, against Dr. T. H. Seay and E. R. Russell, claiming a balance due of four hundred and seventy-five dollars and three cents, upon the following statement, of facts, viz.: The appellant, Dr. Seay, let a contract to E. R. Russell for the building of a residence in the city of Laurel. The contractor, E. R. Russell, sublet to the appellee the plumbing and heating of the residence. Dr. Seay settled in full with the contractor, Russell, but the-contractor failed to settle with the appellee, whereupon the appellee brought this suit, claiming a lien under chapter 232, Laws 1912, and obtained judgment for the amount sued for.

It is the contention of the appellant that this act is unconstitutional ; and that is the only question to be decided by this court. The title to chapter 232, Laws 1912, is:

“An act to amend and enlarge section 3074,, Code of 1906 and to extend’ and enlarge the provisions of same, so as to provide more effective liens for subcontractors, laborers and others employed.”

Section 1 of said act is headed:

“Liens of Laborers and Subcontractors Extended— Code Amended.”

[841]*841As the title to the above act states, it is clearly intended by this act to amend and enlarge section 3074 of the Code of 1906. This act cannot he understood without a reference to the above section of the Code. It speaks of certain designated persons having a lien, hut does not state upon what this lien attaches. It utterly fails to comply with section 61 of the Constitution of the State of Mississippi, which reads as follows:

“No law shall be revived or amended by reference to its title only, hut the section or sections, as amended or revived, shall he inserted at length.”

The acf in question is unconstitutional, because it fails to insert at length, in chapter 232, section 3074 of the Code of 1906, as amended.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Seay v. Laurel Plumbing & Metal Co., 71 So. 9, 110 Miss. 834 (Mich. 1916).

71 So. 9 (Seay v. Laurel Plumbing & Metal Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hughes v. Collegedale Distributors
355 So. 2d 79 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1978)
Corso v. City of Biloxi
29 So. 2d 638 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1947)
City of Jackson v. Deposit Guaranty Bank & Trust Co.
133 So. 195 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1931)
Home for Incurables v. Bruff
153 A. 403 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1931)
Sartin v. Prentiss County
125 So. 563 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1930)
Hart v. Backstrom
113 So. 898 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1927)