Case Name: Lee E. Buchanan, H. M. Watson, P. L. Edwards, C. L. Parade, N. C. McPhaul, Nathan O'Neal, H. L. Bartlett, Joe Ely, George W. Murden, D. M. Campbell and R. W. Keane v. W. C. Arrington and Company, Incorporated, et als.
Court: Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia
Jurisdiction: Virginia
Decision Date: 1934-06-14
Citations: 162 Va. 387
Docket Number: 
Parties: Lee E. Buchanan, H. M. Watson, P. L. Edwards, C. L. Parade, N. C. McPhaul, Nathan O’Neal, H. L. Bartlett, Joe Ely, George W. Murden, D. M. Campbell and R. W. Keane v. W. C. Arrington and Company, Incorporated, et als.
Judges: 
Reporter: Virginia Reports
Volume: 162
Pages: 387–388

Head Matter:
Mytheville
Lee E. Buchanan, H. M. Watson, P. L. Edwards, C. L. Parade, N. C. McPhaul, Nathan O’Neal, H. L. Bartlett, Joe Ely, George W. Murden, D. M. Campbell and R. W. Keane v. W. C. Arrington and Company, Incorporated, et als.
June 14, 1934.
Present, Campbell, C. J., and Holt, Epes, Hudgins and Browning, JJ.
The opinion states the case.
Harry H. Kanter and Segal & Segal, for the appellants.
Smith & Smith, for the appellees.

Opinion:
Hudgins, J.,
delivered the opinion of the court.
W. C. Arrington and Company, Incorporated, instituted this suit for the purpose of enforcing a mechanic's lien which it had perfected on the property of Nellie C. Wright. Numerous mechanic lien creditors, including appellants, filed their separate petitions in the same cause and for the same purpose.
The chancellor held that complainant and the Building Supplies Corporation, another lien creditor, were entitled to the entire sum due by the owner to the general contractor. Eleven of the respondents sought and obtained this appeal. The claim of each is less than $300. This brings the case within the influence of the decision in Gilman v. Ryan, 95 Va. 494, 28 S. E. 875.
For the reasons there stated, the motion to dismiss the appeal, as improvidently awarded, is sustained.
Dismissed.