Case ID: ny_47/html/0678-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Raparlo, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Sophia Anderson, Executrix, etc., Respondent, v. Charlotte B. Dillaye, Appellant.
    (Argued February 25, 1872;
    decided March 26, 1872.)
    Action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien. The legal title to the property was in defendant, but it was claimed that it was paid for out of a trust fund in her hands. Feld, that whatever may have been the fund with which the property was purchased, as between her and those with whom she dealt, she was the owner of the premises within the meaning of the statute.
    
      In the notice of lien, the wages of the persons employed by the plaintiff were charged at fifty cents per day more than was actually paid, the fifty cents being for plaintiff’s compensation or profits upon the labor. The referee, in his report, separated the amount actually paid from the allowance or profits charged. Held, that the plaintiff’s testator was not restricted to the precise sum paid to the employes, but was entitled as well to a lien for the value of the services employed by him; that the separation of the items was not a departure from the bill of particulars, and was not error. The other questions presented were decided upon the facts in the case.
    
      S. D. JDillaye for appellant.
    
      F. Hisoock for respondent.
   Raparlo, J.,

reads opinion for affirmance.

All concur.

Judgment affirmed.