Arbuthnot v. Moody Co., Inc.
| Decision Date | 19 June 1934 |
| Parties | ARBUTHNOT v. MOODY CO., Inc., et al. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Rehearing Denied July 17, 1934.
Suit by C. L. Arbuthnot against Moody Company, Incorporated, and others. From the decree, complainant appeals.
Affirmed. Appeal from Circuit Court, Flagler County George William Jackson, judge.
M. L Stephens, of St. Augustine, for appellant.
H. T. Cook, of Bunnell, and Horn & Ossinsky, of Daytona Beach, for appellees.
The bill of complaint herein, brought to enforce a materialman's lien upon described real estate which had been assigned to C. L. Arbuthnot, alleges that: 'James May applied to said Flagler County Lumber Company and requested it to furnish him the lumber and building materials for a certain building and/or buildings the said James May was then building or about to build on' described land; 'that the said James May was then and there in open possession of said real estate and the beneficial owner thereof under an agreement for the sale thereof to him by one Louetta S. Cochran who then and there held the legal title as trustee for the said James May; that the said Flagler County Lumber Company thereupon contracted and agreed to furnish the said James May certain lumber and building materials to be used in the building and construction of said buildings and structures on said land and that thereafter the said Flagler County Lumber Company did furnish unto the said James May certain lumber and building materials which were contracted and agreed to be furnished by said Company to the said May as aforesaid, and that the same were all used and incorporated and went into the building and construction of said buildings and structures built and constructed by the said James May on said described lots.' That a lien on the land for the material was filed and recorded; that the account and lien of the Flagler County Lumber Company were transferred to C. L. Arbuthnot; that James May died leaving a widow and minor children; that 'Louetta S. Cochran at the time said lumber and building materials were furnished and used * * * had full knowledge thereof and acquiesced and consented thereto; and further that the said Louetta S. Cochran on or about the 6th day of May A. D. 1931, by her warranty deed duly executed, conveyed said real estate above described, to the defendant, Moody Company, Incorporated.' That the defendants, Moody Company, Incorporated, and the widow and minor children of James May, claim some right in the premises which is inferior and subsequent to the right of complainant. An enforcement of the lien is prayed. A motion by Moody Company, Incorporated, to dismiss the bill of complaint was denied. A guardian ad litem was appointed for the minors. A decree pro confesso was entered against the widow of James May. Answers were filed for Moody Company, Incorporated, and the minor children of James May.
Testimony...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Armstrong v. Blackadar
...or aware of improvements being made does not subject his interest to a lien or put him in privity with the plaintiff. Arbuthnot v. Moody Co. Fla. , 155 So. 840.' A careful review of the record shows very little conflict in the facts. Appellees entered into a contract dated March 22, 1958, t......
-
Roberts v. First Federal Sav. & Loan Ass'n of Manatee County, 68--345
...in this land, and an equitable owner as well as the legal owner is an owner within the meaning of this statute. Arbuthnot v. Moody Co., Inc., 1934, 115 Fla. 503, 155 So. 840; Chapman v. Saint Stephens Protestant Episcopal Church, 1931, 105 Fla. 683, 136 So. 238, modified on other grounds 10......
-
Surf Developers, Inc. v. H. E. Nason, Inc.
...on the property were not expressly or impliedly required of the purchasers or called for by the agreement for deed. Arbuthnot v. Moody Co., 115 Fla. 503, 155 So. 840; Lee v. Sas, Fla.1951, 53 So.2d 114; Tremont Company v. Paasche, Fla. 1955, 81 So.2d 489. Cf Tom Joyce Realty Corp. v. Popkin......
-
Tremont Co. v. Paasche
...into a contract for the improvement of such real property'.' Appellants appear to get some comfort out of the case of Arbuthnot v. Moody Co. Inc., 115 Fla. 503, 155 So. 840, but the holding of the Court in that case 'Vendor's mere knowledge that material is being furnished to her contract v......