Long v. Pocahontas Coal Co.

Decision Date28 April 1898
PartiesLONG ET AL. v. POCAHONTAS COAL CO. ET AL.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Appeal from chancery court, Walker county; Thomas Cobbs, Chancellor.

Bill by J. J. Long and another against the Pocahontas Coal Company and others. There was a decree for defendants, and complainants appealed. Affirmed.

By the bill it was sought to enforce a material man's lien for lumber obtained from the complainants, and used by the Pocahontas Coal Company in improving their land, in erecting buildings thereon. The contract for the material purchased from the complainants was made by Phillips & Wiggs Machinery Company, through its president, who represented to complainants that his company owned the Pocahontas Coal Company. Upon the final submission of the cause on the pleadings and proof, the chancellor decreed that the complainants were not entitled to the relief prayed for, and ordered their appeal dismissed. From this decree the complainants appeal, and assign the rendition thereof as error.

Norvell & Smith, for appellants.

White &amp Howze, for appellees.

BRICKELL C.J.

The lien in favor of mechanics, contractors, and material men for work done or materials furnished for any building or improvement on land is purely of statutory origin, and its creation, therefore, depends upon a compliance, in all matters of substance, with the provisions of the statute to which it owes its existence. Chandler v. Hanna, 73 Ala. 393. An essential prerequisite of the statute is that the person entitled to the lien shall, within a specified time, "file in the office of the judge of probate of the county in which the property upon which the lien is sought to be established is situated, a statement in writing, verified by the oath of the claimant, or some other person having knowledge of the facts, containing a just and true account of the demand secured by the lien, after all just credits have been given, a description of the property on which the lien is claimed, and the name of the owner or proprietor thereof." Acts 1894-95, p. 1238; Code 1896; § 2727. When the lien is claimed by one who has furnished materials used in the building or improvements, the verified statement must be filed within four months from the time the indebtedness therefor accrued. The evidence presented in the record fails to show that these preliminary requirements were complied with. The bill alleges that on September 30, 1896, a verified statement of the account was filed in the office of the probate judge of Walker county, and a copy of the statement is attached as an exhibit to the bill, from which it appears that the last item of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 cases
  • Sturdavant v. First Ave. Coal & Lumber Co.
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • 2 Mayo 1929
    ... ... Woodlawn Lbr. Co., 202 Ala. 566, 81 So. 68; Cocciola ... v. Wood-Dickerson Sup. Co., 136 Ala. 532, 33 So. 856; ... Long v. Pocahontas Coal Co., 117 Ala. 587, 23 So ... 526; McConnell v. Meridian Sash & Blind Factory, 112 ... Ala. 582, 20 So. 929; Wadsworth v. Hodge, ... ...
  • Snellings Lumber Co. v. Porter, 5 Div. 101.
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • 9 Junio 1932
    ... ... document aiding and illustrating the other. Grimsley v ... First Ave. Coal & Lumber Co., 217 Ala. 159, 115 So. 90; ... Federal Automobile Ins. Ass'n v. Abrams, 217 ... Ala ... Talladega ... Hardware Co., 195 Ala. 474, 70 So. 660; Long v ... Pocahontas Coal Co., 117 Ala. 587, 23 So. 526; Lane ... & Bodley Co. v. Jones, 79 Ala ... ...
  • Bolton v. Barnett Lumber & Supply Co.
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • 23 Enero 1958
    ...statute. See Hancock v. Taylor, 246 Ala. 521, 524, 21 So.2d 308; Powers v. Grayson, 215 Ala. 33, 34, 109 So. 164; Long v. Pocahontas Coal Co., 117 Ala. 587, 590, 23 So. 526; Leftwich Lumber Co. v. Florence Mutual B. L. & S. Ass'n, 104 Ala. 584, 594, 18 So. The decree appealed from is due to......
  • Lyons v. Howard
    • United States
    • New Mexico Supreme Court
    • 31 Agosto 1911
    ...City of Atchison v. Bartholow, 4 Kan. 124; Western Plumbing Co. v. Fried, 33 Mont. 7, 81 Pac. 396, 114 Am. St. Rep. 799; Long v. Pocahontas Coal Co., 117 Ala. 587, 23 South. 526; Florence Bldg. Ass'n v. Schall, 107 Ala. 531, 18 South. 108; Cook v. Rome Brick Co., 98 Ala. 409, 12 South. 918;......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT