Morrison v. Philippi

Decided May 21, 1886

Supreme Court of Minnesota · decided 1886-05-21

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Clay county, Collins, J., presiding, sustaining a demurrer to the complaint. The action was brought to enforce a mechanic’s lien, and a copy of the affidavit and account for a lien were set out in the complaint.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently January 1941

2 state decisions

Relies on Keller v. Houlihan · Clark v. Schatz · Rugg v. Hoover

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1886-05-21

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Berry, J.

¶1The affidavit of lien claim in this case wholly fails to state that defendant was, either at the time the materials were furnished, or the contract for furnishing them made, the owner of, or of any estate or interest in, the building for the construction of which they were furnished, or of any right, title, or interest in the land upon which the same was erected. Its only allegation in either of these respects is that the “building is situated upon a certain lot owned by” defendant, which cannot mean more than that it is owned by him at the date of the affidavit. It follows that the affidavit is insufficient, under Clark v. Schatz, 24 Minn. 300; Rugg v. Hoover, 28 Minn. 404, (10 N. W. Rep. 473;) Keller v. Houlihan, 32 Minn. 486, (21 N. W. Rep. 729;) and Anderson v. Knudsen, 33 Minn. 172, (22 N. W. Rep. 302.)

¶2Order affirmed.