From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bouchard Brothers v. Guisti

Supreme Court of Rhode Island. PROVIDENCE
Apr 15, 1901
22 R.I. 591 (R.I. 1901)

Summary

In Bouchard v. Guisti, 22 R.I. 591, the notice was held defective in not stating for what building the materials were furnished, and in McElroy v. Keily, 27 R.I. 64, and McDuff Coal Lumber Co. v. Monaco, 32 R.I. 323, a joint notice and a joint account, covering two separate houses in the former case and three such houses in the latter case, were held insufficient in that the statute called for a separate notice and account for each house.

Summary of this case from Art Metal Construction Co. v. Knight

Opinion

April 15, 1901.

PRESENT: Stiness, C.J., Tillinghast and Douglas, JJ.

(1) Mechanics' Lien. Notice. Gen. Laws cap. 206, § 7, provides that the commencement of legal process to enforce a lien shall be the lodging the account or demand for which the lien is claimed in the office of the town clerk of the town, with notice to what building, improvement, and land the account or demand refers: — Held, that a notice filed under this section was defective in not stating for what building the materials were furnished.

CONSOLIDATED PETITIONS to enforce mechanics' liens. Gen. Laws cap. 206, § 7, is as follows: "The commencement of legal process to enforce the liens hereby created shall be the lodging the account or demand for which the lien is claimed in the office of the town clerk of the town or towns in which the building . . . or other improvement is situated, with notice to what building . . . improvement and land, and to what or whose estate in the same, the said account or demand refers". . . .

S.T. Douglas, F.A. Greene, and P.H. Quinn, for petitioners.

H.A. McKenney, for respondents.


The court is of opinion that the notice which constitutes the commencement of legal process, Gen. Laws cap. 206, § 7, is defective in not stating for what building the materials were furnished. Indeed, it does not state that they were furnished for any building or improvement at all.

Petitions dismissed.


Summaries of

Bouchard Brothers v. Guisti

Supreme Court of Rhode Island. PROVIDENCE
Apr 15, 1901
22 R.I. 591 (R.I. 1901)

In Bouchard v. Guisti, 22 R.I. 591, the notice was held defective in not stating for what building the materials were furnished, and in McElroy v. Keily, 27 R.I. 64, and McDuff Coal Lumber Co. v. Monaco, 32 R.I. 323, a joint notice and a joint account, covering two separate houses in the former case and three such houses in the latter case, were held insufficient in that the statute called for a separate notice and account for each house.

Summary of this case from Art Metal Construction Co. v. Knight

In Bouchard v. Guisti, 22 R.I. 591, the notice failed to state that the materials were furnished for any building or improvement at all.

Summary of this case from Miller v. Trus. Methodist Epis. Church
Case details for

Bouchard Brothers v. Guisti

Case Details

Full title:BOUCHARD BROTHERS et al. vs. VINCENZO GUISTI et al

Court:Supreme Court of Rhode Island. PROVIDENCE

Date published: Apr 15, 1901

Citations

22 R.I. 591 (R.I. 1901)
48 A. 934

Citing Cases

Miller v. Trus. Methodist Epis. Church

In order to extend to these authorities any applicability to the case before us it would be necessary to…

Hawkins, Etc. v. Boyden

A declaration is amendable; but a substantial defect in an attachment cannot be cured by amendment. Greene v.…