Heston v. Martin
HESTON v. MARTIN
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Joseph G. Baldwin (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion — Baldwin
Baldwin, J., delivered the opinion of the Court Field J., conccurring.
This appeal is without merit, and it is apparent that the only point seriously urged by the appellant—to wit: that an account is necessary, giving the items of work and materials in the statement of lien filed— cannot be maintained in case of a contract for a sum in gross.
Judgment affirmed, with ten per cent, damages.
Cited by
- Johnson v. Smith Docket No. 6204. · 1929-03-25
- Jewell v. McKay No. 12480 · 1889-12-20
- Hicks v. Murray No. 3,001 · 1872-04-15
- Davis v. Livingston · 1865-07-01