Ranson v. Sheehan

Decision Date31 October 1883
Citation78 Mo. 668
PartiesRANSON, Plaintiff in Error, v. SHEEHAN.
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

Error to Buchanan Circuit Court.--HON. JOSEPH P. GRUBB, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Graham G. Lacy and Vinton Pike for plaintiff in error.

Franklin Porter for defendant in error.

PHILIPS, C.

This is an action to enforce a mechanic's lien; and the matter to be determined depends on the sufficiency of the petition. The original petition was filed August 19, 1875. On September 4, 1876, plaintiff filed an amended petition against Edward Sheehan and his wife Frances, and Charles B. Wilkinson. The amended petition alleged that Edward and Frances were the owners of fifteen and one-half acres of ground described in the petition, and that said Edward had, in 1875, for himself and on account of his wife, and with her full knowledge and consent, and for her immediate use, enjoyment and benefit, entered into a contract with plaintiff to erect, build and complete the brick work of a brick addition, and to furnish red brick and sand and mortar in making other improvements to the one-story brick dwelling with stone basement, owned by said Edward and Frances Sheehan, and situated on their land described in said petition, for which plaintiff was to be paid as set forth in said petition, and that pursuant to said agreement plaintiff furnished material and did the work in making said addition and improvements, all of which amounted to $511.70, upon which plaintiff had been paid the sum of $75, leaving a balance due plaintiff of $436.70; that all of said work was done and materials furnished between April 1 and May 8, 1875, and that the last item of plaintiff's claim was furnished on May 8, 1875. The petition avers that plaintiff duly performed all things on his part as required by his said agreement, and further alleges “that on August 18, 1875, plaintiff filed in the office of the circuit court of Buchanan county a just and true account of the demand due to him for the work done and materials furnished, as aforesaid, after all just credits were given, which was claimed to be a lien upon the building and improvements, for and on account of which said work was done and said materials were furnished, and also a true description of the property, so that the land on which the lien was intended to apply could and can be identified, and also setting forth the name of the owners of the property so subject to said lien, which account and statement was duly verified by the plaintiff who thereby claimed and intended to enforce a lien for the amount so due him as aforesaid against the above-mentioned building and improvements, and the land on which they are situated to the extent of one acre, which account and claim of lien are now on file in said office. Plaintiff avers that on May 7, 1875 the said Edward Sheehan and Frances A. Sheehan did, by warranty deed, convey the real estate above described to the defendant Charles B. Wilkinson, which conveyance was executed after the work aforesaid had been nearly completed, and the day before the last of said materials were furnished, as aforesaid, by plaintiff, of which conveyance plaintiff had no knowledge antil after said May 8, 1875. Plaintiff also avers that the defendants, each and all, have failed and refused to designate or set apart the acre of ground subject to plaintiff's lien as aforesaid; that one Jeremiah Irwin also claims a lien against the said building and improvements and one acre of ground upon which they are situated, for work and labor done on said building and improvements, and is prosecuting his suit in this court to establish his said lien and to obtain a special judgment according to the statute in such case made and provided; that plaintiff knows of no other person or persons holding or claiming a mechanic's lien against said property; that plaintiff and said Irwin have caused to be measured, designated and defined, one acre of ground out of the land above described, and upon which said building is situated,” which said acre of land, so measured, defined and designated, the petition set out in full. It then averred that upon this acre of ground and building and improvements before mentioned, the plaintiff claims a lien for the amount aforesaid for the work and material furnished; that the account accrued and became due and payable on May 8th, 1875, when payment was demanded and refused.

The defendants failing to answer said petition, their default was duly entered, and at the January term, 1877, the cause coming on to be heard upon an inquiry of damages, the plaintiff introduced evidence proving that he had performed the work and furnished the material charged in his petition upon the building described in the petition, and that said building is the only one on said fifteen-acre tract, and that the work and materials were reasonably worth the amount charged in the petition. Upon this evidence and upon the statements of the petition not denied, plaintiff submitted the cause.

Thereupon the defendant read in evidence the account and statement filed in the clerk's office, upon which plaintiff claimed his mechanic's lien which is as follows:

ST. JOSEPH, MO., August 18, 1875.

Edward Sheehan and Frances A. Sheehan,

To William Z. Ranson, Dr.,

(It mized Statement)

To balance

$436 70

After setting forth the itemized account under the above heading, the statement follows that it is a just and true account of the demand due plaintiff, after all just credits are given, for materials furnished and work done in erecting an addition to the one-story brick dwelling house with one basement situated on the fifteen and one-half acre tract of land, which is described as in the petition, and that the work was done and materials furnished between a day in April and May 8, 1875, the last labor being performed on the last named date; that Frances and Edward were together the owners of said real estate, and that said Edward for himself and for...

To continue reading

Request your trial
42 cases
  • Moller-Vandenboom Lbr. Co. v. Boudreau
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • July 16, 1935
    ...of the statute to entitle him to decree or judgment subordinating to his lien the prior lien of the mortgage or deed of trust. Rauson v. Sheehan, 78 Mo. 668; 18 R.C.L., "Mechanic's Liens," 877-879; 40 C.J. 53, Sec. 14 (Mechanic's Liens); Landau v. Cottrill, 60 S.W. 64, 65, 66; Coe v. Ritter......
  • Moller-Vandenboom Lumber Co. v. Boudreau
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • July 16, 1935
    ...of the statute to entitle him to decree or judgment subordinating to his lien the prior lien of the mortgage or deed of trust. Rauson v. Sheehan, 78 Mo. 668; 18 C. L., "Mechanic's Liens," 877-879; 40 C. J. 53, Sec. 14 (Mechanic's Liens); Landau v. Cottrill, 60 S.W. 64, 65, 66; Coe v. Ritter......
  • Hertel Elec. Co. v. Gabriel, 7452
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • June 7, 1956
    ...494. 2 And, a number of cases indicate that, where the rights of innocent third parties have not intervened [contrast Ranson v. Sheehan, 78 Mo. 668, 673(2)] and the property description in the lien claim or original petition is inaccurate but (as in the instant case) embraces the land on wh......
  • Banner Lumber Co. v. Robson
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • April 7, 1914
    ...not concerned with the rights of third parties, in which case a stricter rule may be applied. [See DeWitt v. Smith, 63 Mo. 263; Ranson v. Sheehan, 78 Mo. 668; Bros. v. McCrary, 45 Mo.App. 365.] Here the owner's husband and agent looked to the erection of the buildings, ordered material from......
  • 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