From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Steiger v. London

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jan 1, 1907
52 Misc. 462 (N.Y. App. Term 1907)

Opinion

January, 1907.

Louis O. Van Doren, for appellant.

Johnston Johnston (Edward W.S. Johnston, of counsel), for respondents.


This is an appeal by a lienor from an order overruling the said lienor's objection to the jurisdiction of the City Court and approving an undertaking given to discharge a lien and directing the canceling of the lien. The lien was for $7,300, and the amount of the undertaking $8,000. No action on the lien has been commenced. Section 315, subdivision 2, of the Code, gives the City Court jurisdiction in an action to foreclose or enforce a lien for labor and materials upon real property, without specifying any monetary limitation. Section 3399, however, provides that a mechanic's lien may be enforced by an action "in a court which has jurisdiction in an action founded on a contract for a sum of money equivalent to the amount of such debt." Section 316, subdivision 1, of the Code, provides that, in an action for a sum of money only, in the City Court, the amount of the judgment cannot exceed $2,000, exclusive of interest and costs, except where the action is brought on a bond or undertaking given in an action or special proceeding in the same court, or before a justice thereof, or for breach of promise of marriage, or where it is a marine cause referred to in section 317. The Code also limits the jurisdiction of the City Court to $2,000 in an action to recover chattels, or to foreclose a lien on chattels, or where judgment is entered on confession; but nowhere is any limit specifically fixed in an action to foreclose a mechanic's lien, except as it is by section 3399, above quoted. The City Court is an inferior court, with no inherent powers, and depends entirely upon statutory permission in assuming jurisdiction; and the facts necessary to its jurisdiction will not be presumed, but must be made to appear affirmatively. 29 Misc. 283. The statute (Code, § 316) limits its jurisdiction, as we have seen, to $2,000 in an action for a sum of money, which limit is extended inferentially to actions to enforce a mechanic's lien by section 3399 of the Code; and nowhere is power conferred upon it to cancel a mechanic's lien for a sum in excess of this statutory limit.

We conclude, therefore, that the court was without jurisdiction in making the order in question; which is reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

BLANCHARD and DAYTON, JJ., concur.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursement.


Summaries of

Matter of Steiger v. London

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jan 1, 1907
52 Misc. 462 (N.Y. App. Term 1907)
Case details for

Matter of Steiger v. London

Case Details

Full title:Matter of the Mechanic's Lien of FERDINAND STEIGER, Claimant-Appellant, v…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term

Date published: Jan 1, 1907

Citations

52 Misc. 462 (N.Y. App. Term 1907)
102 N.Y.S. 497