Rider-Ericsson Engine Co. v. Fredericks

Citations

• 25 Pa. Super. 72
• 1904 Pa. Super. LEXIS 17

Syllabus

<p>Mechanic’s lien — Evidence—Presumption—Burden of proof — Case for jury —Credit of builcling or contractor.</p> <p>When the claimant in a mechanic’s lien has complied with all the provisions of the statute, it is presumed that the materials were furnished or the work was done on the credit of the building. This is a rebuttable presumption, but the general rule is that the burden of showing that it is not in accordance with the fact is cast on the defendant. But while the claimant may rest his case upon proof that the materials were furnished for and entered into the. construction of the building, yet if he goes further and undertakes to establish by evidence upon whose or what credit the materials were furnished, and in the presentation of his case develops facts, which, taken in connection with the defendant’s evidence, are sufficient to sustain a finding that the materials were furnished on the exclusive credit of the contractor or other person to whom he sold them, it is the duty of the court to submit the question to the jury.</p> <p>Appeals — Assignments of error — Charge—Detached portion of charge.</p> <p>Where special instructions were not asked for at the trial, and particular error of law or material misstatement of the evidence cannot be pointed out, the court will be reviewed on the general effect of the charge, and not upon sentences or paragraphs disconnected from the context which qualifies and explains them ; if, as a whole, the charge was calculated to mislead there is error in the record, if not, there is none.</p>