Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

83 Ala. 443

Roman v. Thorn & Gorrie

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided December 15, 1887

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1887-12-15

Tried before the Hon. John F. Hubbard. This action was brought by Thorn & Gorrie, suing as partners, against Sigmund Eoman, “individually, and as agent of Sarah Eoman, Hannah Schram, Eegina Levy, and L. Gugenheim,” as he was described in the summons; or, as described in the second count of the complaint, “ individually, and as agent and trustee for his wife, Mrs. Sarah Eoman, and for Hannah Schram, Eegina Levy, and L. Gugenheim.” The first count of the complaint claimed.…

Relies on Trammell v. Hudmon

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1887-12-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently September 1989

11 state decisions

2018871890190019101920193019401950196019701980decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

SOMERVILLE, J.

¶1The suit is one brought for the enforcement of a mechanic’s lien under the provisions of the statute. — Code, 1886, §§ 3018-3048.

¶2It is fatally defective in making the agent of the owner or proprietor of the lands on which the improvements were made, the sole party defendant to the proceeding. While the lien created by the statute may arise on a contract made by the agent, or trustee of such owner or proprietor, the suit authorized by the statute is one against the principal, and not against the agent. The defendant, Eoman, as an individual, may have been a proper party defendant, as trustee of his wife’s statutory separate estate, under section 3030, which authorizes all persons interested in the matter in controversy, or in the property charged with the lien, to be made parties.—Trammell v. Hudmon, 78 Ala. 222. But it could not be maintained against him alone, so as to establish *445a lien on the property owned by the others who have not had their day in court.

¶3The court erred in not sustaining the demurrer to the complaint, and in refusing to give the general affirmative charge requested by the defendant.

¶4Reversed and remanded.

Clopton, J. not sitting.
/83/ala/443 · .json · Public domain