TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Kelly v. Brown

Kelly versus Brown

Kelly v. Brown, 20 Pa. 446 (1853)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · State Highest Courts
Decided
April 21, 1853
Judges
Woodward
Citations
20 Pa. 4461853 Pa. LEXIS 62
Headnotes
1. It is not necessary that, in an account for materials furnished for the erection of a house, they should be charged in the precise words of the Mechanics' Lien Act of 1836, viz., as furnished, “ for or about the erection or construction of the same.'' — Equivalent words are sufficient. 2. An account stating the materials to have been delivered to the contractor named “ for John Brown's house on Delaware Twelfth street, below Bedford street,'' was admissible in evidence in support of the claim. 3. Even though the materials furnished have been charged by the seller to the contractor individually, it is competent to show that they were furnished on the credit of the building sought to be charged.
Summary
Error, to the Common Pleas, Philadelphia. This was scire facias, under the Mechanics’ Lien Act, by John Kelly against John Brown, owner, and William G-. Marshall, contractor, for materials furnished. The claim filed was as follows: John Kelly, of the county of Philadelphia, lumber merchant, files this his claim to secure payment of the sum of seventy-three dollars and twenty-five cents against a three-story brick house on, the west side of Delaware Twelfth street, thirty-four feet six inches south of Bedford street, containing in front sixteen feet six inches, and in depth seventeen feet six inches, and the lot of ground extending in depth sixty-five feet. The said claim is for lumber furnished by the said John Kelly on the credit of the said house and ground within the last six months, at the instance and on the request of the said William Gr. Marshall, he being the contractor and builder off the said house, and the said John Brown being the owner of said house and ground. The said John Kelly annexes a bill of particulars of his said claim, as a part hereof, and claims a lien on the said house and ground, for the said sum of seventy-three dollars and twenty-five cents, from the commencement of the said house. Signed, ‘ John Kelly. ' July 81, 1848. A copy of the account followed. It was stated, William Gr. Marshall, for John Brown's house, on Delaware Twelfth street, below Bedford street. 1847. November 25, &c., &c., amounting in all to, . . $>73.85 The last item being dated February 15, 1848. The claim was filed July 81, 1848. The plaintiff proved his book of original entries, and it was stated, in the paper-book on his part, that in the book the materials were charged “to the defendants and the premises therein described.” No evidence was offered on the part of the defendants, hut objection was made to the recovery, because it was not set forth in the claim that the materials were furnished “ for or about the erection or construction of the building.” It was stated that, on the part of the plaintiff, it was further offered to show “that the materials were furnished for and in the building but that the Court was of the opinion that any further evidence would be of no avail; that the claim was defective. Kelly, J., charged that the claim was defective, in not setting forth that the materials were furnished for or about the erection and construction of the building, and, therefore, that the verdict must be for defendant. Such charge was assigned for error.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Woodward

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

The opinion of the Court was delivered, by Woodward, J.

The lien filed in this ease, beside describing the building with more particularity than is demanded by the Act of Assembly, contains a copy of the plaintiff’s account for materials, showing that they were charged to the contractor “for John Brown’s house.”

The plaintiff offered evidence in support of his lien, and it ought to have been received. Even if the materials had been charged to the contractor individually, it would have been competent to show that they were furnished on the credit of that particular building: Presbyterian Church v. Allison, 10 Barr 413. Obviously, then, an account, which, on its face, recognised the building to be charged, was competent.

It is not necessary that the account should contain the very words of the statute, “for or about the ereetion or construction of the building.” Any equivalent words are sufficient. “Bor John Brown’s house” is as good a designation as the more tautological phrase of the Legislature.

The judgment is reversed and a venire de novo awarded.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1897: 118972026peak 1897 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Wharton v. Real Estate Investment Co.36 A. 725 (Pa. 1897)

Most recent

  1. Wharton v. Real Estate Investment Co.36 A. 725 (Pa. 1897)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list