Jeure v. Perkins
Jeure v. Perkins
Opinion of the Court
The defendant, the proprietor,' demurred to the petition, stating generally that the petition did not state facts sufficient to maintain a cause of action, and specifying that it does not show that the notice given by the subcontractor to the proprietor was in writing ; and, as another special cause of demurrer, that βthe petition does not allege that there was money in the hands of proprietor when subcontractor settled with contractor.β The demurrer was sustained by the circuit court, for the reason last mentioned, and the general term sustained the demurrer for the reason first mentioned. If a demurrer is filed and sustained, and from the ruling on the demurrer an appeal is taken to this court, we sustain the demurrer if it is well taken, though the court below did not give a reason for its ruling in which we concur.
We do not concur in the reason given by the circuit court for its ruling, but we hold that the notice which the subcontractor must give to the proprietor, of his intention to claim a lien,'should be in writing. Section 1850 of the Revision provides that the notice above referred to may be served by a sheriff or constable, and that their return shall be evidence. This could not be done unless the notice was in writing, and we think the statute requires this by implication.
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.