VARNER
v.
NEW HAMPSHIRE SAVINGS BANK; HAINES TILE & MANTEL COMPANY V. SAME; JACKSON-WALKER COAL & MATERIAL COMPANY V. SAME
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's decision in a bankruptcy priority dispute where mechanics' lien claimants argued they held superior rights based on beginning construction before mortgages were recorded. The Court held that the construction work performed prior to the mortgage recordation was merely a pretense and did not constitute a commencement of building under Kansas law, thus the mortgage creditors retained priority over the mechanics' liens.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Justice McReynolds delivered the opinion of the court.
This is a contest for priority between creditors of a bankrupt. Appellees claim under mortgages upon certain real estate in Wichita alleged to have been recorded before building operations on the property were commenced. Appellants maintain construction began prior to recordation and that they are secured by preferred mechanics’ liens created by the Kansas statute. Disagreeing with the District. Court but in accord with the referee’s opinion, the Circuit Court of Appeals (216 Fed. Rep. 721) held that no “such work as amounted to the commencement of the building within the meaning of the Kansas statute” was performed prior to the time when the* mortgages were placed on record, and “that what was done was but a mere pretense at the commencement of a building, done to defeat bona fide prior liens.” And it accordingly adjudged the mortgage creditors entitled to priority.
The essential question presented is one of fact; and there is sharp dispute in the testimony. Substantial difficulties are disclosed but after considering the evidence we think it sustains the conclusions reached by the Circuit Court of Appeals; and the judgment entered there is accordingly
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Associated AIR Transp., Inc., 275 F.2d 827 (5th Cir. 1960)…ffect, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be subject for each offense to a fine of not less than 8100 and not more than 85,000.” . See among countless cases: Southern Ry. Co. v. Prescott, 1916, 240 U.S. 632, 36 S.Ct. 409, 60 L.Ed. 836; Texas & P. R. Co. v. Mugg & Dryden, 1906, 202 U.S. 242, 20 S.Ct. 628, 50 L.Ed. 1011; Armour Packing Co. v. United States, 1908, 209 U.S. 56, 28 S.Ct. 428, 52 L.Ed. 681; New York Cent. & H. R. R. Co. v. United States, 1909, 212 U.S. 50…
Authorities Cited
- Ill. Cent. R.R. Co. v. Sheegog, 215 U.S. 308 (U.S. 1909)
- Chicago v. Dowell, 229 U.S. 102 (U.S. 1913)
- De Villanueva v. Villanueva, 239 U.S. 293 (U.S. 1915)