Hennepin Lumber Co. v. Pedersen
Can I rely on this case?
Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.
(as of 9/30/2026)
Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 1968, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.
Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error
Cases that cite this one
3 later published cases cite this decision.
- W. B. Martin Lumber Co. v. Noss (Minn. 1959)
- Rochester's Suburban Lumber Company v. Slocumb (Minn. 1968)
- Kahle v. McClary (Minn. 1959)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
This action was brought to foreclose a mechanic’s lien for materials furnished in the erection of a house. The defense was that the lien was not filed within ninety days after the last item was furnished. The trial court upheld this defense and decided the case for defendants. Plaintiff appealed from the judgment ■entered pursuant to this decision.
The case was correctly decided. The evidence showed that the house was practically completed in December, 1909. The owner settled with the contractor and ■occupied the house. He retained about $60 to pay for screens which the contractor delivered in February. On April 9, eleven days before the time for filing .a lien expired the contractor ordered and plaintiff delivered to the premises four ■small boards. The evidence is clear that they were not needed; they were thrown ■down by the side of the house and left there, but afterwards taken away. The ■date when the last item of materials was furnished was January 20. The lion ■statement was filed July 6. The trial court was fully justified in finding that the construction of the house was fully completed January 20, and that the delivery of the boards in April was an entirely independent transaction between plaintiff and the contractor.
Judgment affirmed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.