CANDICE CO. INC. v. Ricketts

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that, where the original contractor assigned its rights to a lien claim to the plaintiff, the lien claim was defective because the plaintiff inaccurately described itself as the original contracting party
• holding that, where the original contractor assigned its rights to a lien claim to the plaintiff, the lien claim was defective because the plaintiff inaccurately described itself as the original contracting party
• considering issues raised on appeal absent a report of proceedings because the report of proceedings “would contain only the arguments of counsel and the remarks of the judge, none of which would be controlling in our determination of a question of law”
• “The Ronning court concluded that, based on these facts, the lien was invalid because it did not contain a sufficient statement of the contract forming the basis of the claims.”
• in addition to an underlying contract, an assignment reflecting that the plaintiff has title to the claim is a document upon which the action is founded and must be attached
• “The Ronning court concluded that, based on these facts, the lien was invalid because it did not contain a sufficient statement of the contract forming the basis of the claims.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).