Smith v. Headley

• Decision Date: 25 May 1885
• Citation: 33 Minn. 384
• Parties: H. ALDEN SMITH and another <I>vs.</I> JAMES J. HEADLEY and another.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

33 Minn. 384

H. ALDEN SMITH and anothervs.

JAMES J. HEADLEY and another.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

May 25, 1885.

Action to enforce a mechanic's lien, brought by plaintiffs, as partners,

in the district court for Ramsey county. The complaint, after alleging partnership, was as follows, viz.:

"That on and between the first day of July, 1883, and the ninth day of October, 1883, plaintiffs sold and delivered to the defendant Headley, at his special instance and request, goods, wares, merchandise and lumber of the agreed price and reasonable value of $738.05; no part of which sum has ever been paid, except the sum of $196.07. That there is still due and owing on account of said sale an unpaid balance of $541.98.

"That said goods, wares, merchandise and lumber were furnished as aforesaid in and for, and used in, the erecting and building of a certain dwelling-house, situated upon a certain piece or pieces of land situate in Ramsey county and state of Minnesota, and described as follows, to wit" (describing lots mentioned in the opinion) "and which said dwelling-house was being erected and built by said James J. Headley for said Nelson C. Thrall, under and by virtue of contract between said Headley and said Thrall defendants.

"That said premises are not included in the limits of any city, town or village plat, and said premises do not exceed forty acres in area. That the defendant Thrall was during all said times and now is the owner of said dwelling-house and said real estate on which said dwelling-house is situate.

"That on the seventh day of December, 1883, plaintiffs made an account in writing of the items of labor and materials furnished as aforesaid, and the value thereof, showing balance due, and thereupon, by said James T. Wyman, one of said plaintiffs, made oath to the correctness thereof; and on said seventh day of December, 1883, filed the same for record in the office of the registry of deeds, in and for said Ramsey county.

"Wherefore plaintiffs demand judgment," etc.

The answer, among other defences, alleged that the premises described were on July 13, 1883, and ever since have been the homestead of defendant Thrall.

On the trial before Brill, J., without a jury, the plaintiffs introduced in evidence the verified account, which was substantially in the following form, viz.:

                                                    "MINNEAPOLIS, MINN., Oct. 18, 1883
                        "J. J. Headley, Del. to N. C. Thrall house, Merriam Park
                                      Bought of Smith & Wyman
                  "1883
                "July 3. 5 Wds. 32x38 — 2 Lt. 1¾ Gld., D. S.
                         2  "   18x38 — 2  "   "     "    S. S.
                         *      *       *        *         *     *
                         (here follow about 90 items.)
                         16 pine balusters 1¾.
                           Contract net     -      -        -      -                593  00
                "Sept. 4. 350 ft. Mldg. No. 673, 2.00   -      .      -      7  00
                                "Disc. 40 per cent.        -      -          2  80    4  20
                         *       *       *       *      *      *
                

The court found, among other facts, that plaintiffs made the agreement to furnish the materials on June 21, 1883, that the first of the material was furnished prior to July 13, 1883, and the last on October 9, 1883, that the material furnished was used in constructing the dwelling as alleged, and that the premises became the homestead of defendant Thrall on July 13, 1883. Judgment was ordered for plaintiffs, and defendant Thrall appeals from an order refusing a new trial.

John W. Willis, for appellant.

E. C. Chatfield, for respondent.

GILFILLAN, C. J.

This action is to enforce a lien for materials furnished by plaintiffs to defendant Headley, for the purpose of, and which were used in the construction of, a house for defendant Thrall, and on his land, Headley being his contractor for such construction. On the trial the defendant Thrall raised objections to the complaint — First, by a motion for judgment on the pleadings; and, secondly, by objection to any evidence on the part of plaintiffs being received, for the reason that, as the defendant claims, the complaint does not state a cause of action.

One objection to the complaint is that while the statute gives a lien on only a single tract of land, in the complaint no lien is claimed against any particular tract of land, but a lien is claimed against several distinct lots, i. e., several distinct tracts of land. The complaint alleges that the building is situated upon a certain piece or pieces of land described as "lots Nos. 7, 8, and 9, in block 8, of Merriam's rearrangement of blocks 7, 8, 9, 10, and 16, in Merriam's park, as the same is platted, filed, and of record in the office of the registry of deeds in said Ramsey county, Minnesota," and it claims a lien on the same. The statute (Gen. St....