Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

8 Daly 166

Fogarty v. Wick

New York Court of Common Pleas

Decided December 2, 1878

New York Court of Common Pleas · decided 1878-12-02

Appeal by the defendant, Jacob Wick, Jr., from a judgment of this court, entered upon the report of John J. Townsend, to whom it had been referred to hear and determine the issues. The action was brought to foreclose a mechanic’s lien claimed to have been secured under L. 1875, c. 379. The suit was defended ■ on the ground that the notice of lien which had been filed did not conform with the requirements of the act.

Decided 1878-12-02

Charles P. Daly, Chief Justice.

¶1The notice filed does not contain several of the requisites of the notice which is now required by the act of 1875 to create a lien.

¶2The notice does not contain statements which are indispensable under the 5th section of the act (L. 1875, c. 379). It does not state that the claim of $1122 is after deducting all just credits and offsets ; nor by whom the plaintiff was employed, or to whom he furnished the materials: nor the terms or conditions of the contract, or whether all the work *167or materials for which the claim is made was actually performed or furnished. No lien was created by the filing of such a notice, and no lien having been created, no court could acquire any jurisdiction to entertain any proceedings under it (Quimby v. Jones, 2 E. D. Smith, 609 ; Jones v. Walker, 16 Abb. Pr. N. S. 359 ; McGraw v. Godfrey, Id. 358). It has been held that where a lien was created by the filing of a proper notice, but the right to enforce the proceedings in rem was lost by the failure to have the lien renewed, that the court, having acquired originally jurisdiction, might,'as-between the parties, render a personal judgment, but this is not such a case.

¶3The judgment upon the report of the referee will therefore have to be reversed.

¶4Van Hoesen, J., concurred.

¶5Judgment reversed.

/8/daly/166 · .json · Public domain