Bolton v. Hey

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Bolton v. Hey, 148 Pa. 156 (Pa. 1892)
23 A. 973; 1892 Pa. LEXIS 932
Ctjeiam, Green, Heydrick, McCollum, Mitchell, Paxson, Sterrett, Williams

Bolton v. Hey

Opinion of the Court

Pee Ctjeiam,

The learned judge of the court below held that the affidavit of defence was sufficient to prevent judgment. In this we think he was right. The case comes directly within the ruling in Schroeder v. Galland, 134 Pa. 277. Indeed, the contract appears to have been drawn with reference to that decision, as its language is identical with the opinion of Mr. Justice G reen. We adhere to the law of that case. It follows that the judgment of the court below must be affirmed.

Reference

Cited By
2 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
Mechanics' liens — Contract providing against — Subcontractor. Where a contract for the erection of a building entered into prior to the act of June 8, 1891, P. L. 225, provided that no mechanics’ liens should be filed, a subcontractor is bound thereby: Schroeder v. Galland, 184 Pa. 277.