Case Name: Michael Reilly, Resp't, v. Edward R. Poerschke et al., App'lts
Court: New York City Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1895-11-23
Citations: 72 N.Y. St. Rep. 260
Docket Number: 
Parties: Michael Reilly, Resp’t, v. Edward R. Poerschke et al., App’lts.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 72
Pages: 260–260

Head Matter:
Michael Reilly, Resp’t, v. Edward R. Poerschke et al., App’lts.
(New York City Court, General Term,
Filed November 23, 1895.)
Mechanic’s lien—Bond—Leave op court.
It is not necessary to obtain leave of the court to bring an action against the sureties on a contractor’s bond.
Appeal from judgment in favor of plaintiff.
Frome Bros., for app’lt; F. Schaeffler, for resp’t.

Opinion:
FITZSIMORS, J.
— The complaint contains, we think, all the necessary allegations. Morton v. Tucker, 145 N. Y. 244 ; 64 St. Rep. 685.
It was not necessary to obtain leave of the court to bring an action against the sureties on the bond. It took the place of the liened property, and only the same proceedings were necessary to prosecute the bond as were required to foreclose the lien. Under the complaint, the plaintiff was entitled to a judgment of foreclosure. That being so, lie had the right to a judgment against the sureties on the bond.
The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.
All concur.