From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Weinheimer v. Hutzler

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 9, 1932
234 App. Div. 566 (N.Y. App. Div. 1932)

Opinion

March 9, 1932.

Appeal from County Court of Erie County.

Gibbons, Pottle Pottle [ Frank Gibbons of counsel], for the appellant.

Bagley, Wechter, McCormick Irvin [ Vincent T. Ray of counsel], for the respondent Weinheimer.

James E. Owens [ Winton H. Church of counsel], for the respondent Fisher.

Present — SEARS, P.J., CROUCH, EDGCOMB, THOMPSON and CROSBY, JJ.


We find no substantial error in the judgments appealed from except in respect to the provisions adjudging recovery for any deficiency remaining after sale. The evidence was sufficient to warrant an inference that the materials were furnished and the labor performed with the "consent" of the owner within the meaning of section 3 Lien of the Lien Law. ( Pope v. Heckscher, 109 App. Div. 495; affd., 190 N.Y. 508; National Wall Paper Co. v. Sire, 163 id. 131.) But personal liability is another matter. Evidence which warrants an inference of consent sufficient to give a lien is not necessarily sufficient to warrant an inference of an agreement, express or implied, to pay. (Compare Schwartz Co., Inc., v. Aimwell Co., Inc., 204 App. Div. 769, 775; affd., 236 N.Y. 672.) There is no finding that Hutzler assumed any personal liability, nor is there any evidence upon which such a finding could rest.

Each judgment should be modified by striking out the provision for the recovery of deficiency and as so modified affirmed, without costs.

All concur.


Judgments modified by striking out the provisions for deficiency judgments and as so modified affirmed, without costs of this appeal to any party. Conclusion of law No. IV modified in accordance with the opinion.


Summaries of

Weinheimer v. Hutzler

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 9, 1932
234 App. Div. 566 (N.Y. App. Div. 1932)
Case details for

Weinheimer v. Hutzler

Case Details

Full title:JOHN F. WEINHEIMER, Respondent, v. ELIZABETH K. HUTZLER, Appellant…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Mar 9, 1932

Citations

234 App. Div. 566 (N.Y. App. Div. 1932)
256 N.Y.S. 7

Citing Cases

Weinheimer v. Hutzler

Present — Sears, P.J., Edgcomb, Thompson and Crosby, JJ. See 234 App. Div. 566. — [REP. Order made March 9,…

Noce v. Kaufman

Nathan Richman's knowledge that plaintiffs were performing labor and furnishing material would subject his…