Summary

Samuel Blatchford Wright v. Kentucky G E Railway Company…

The terms of the construction contract are inconsistent with the idea of any ownership of the constructed road by the construction company, or any lien on it by that company. That company was to have all the money, municipal bonds, and property given or issued in payment of subscriptions to stock, and all stock not necessary to maintain the charter or not issued to municipal corporations for subscriptions to stock, the charter or not issued to mortgage bonds, secured by the mortgage as 'a first lien,' and $1,200,000 in an equipment bond, secured by an equipment mortgage.
Source: Wikisource

Samuel Blatchford Wright v. Kentucky G E Railway Company…

It is manifest that in this proposition the owners of the Big Sandy property were providing for the completion of the Big Sandy road, under the charter of the Big Standy Company and the act of 1866; for the only authority for the issuing of bonds of the county of Mason was that given by the charter of the Big Sandy Company, and, by the proposition, the bonds of that county to be taken in payment were bonds to be issued for a subscription to stock by that county, and the work which was to commence in six months was work on the Big Sandy road.
Source: Wikisource

Samuel Blatchford Wright v. Kentucky G E Railway Company…

The petition asserts that the plaintiff has a first and prior lien on the entire property of the Great Eastern Company, including road, franchises, rights, privileges, improvements, and everything appertaining to the defendants' property, for the $350,000 and interest, and especially a first and prior lien on that part of the line on which the labor was performed and the materials were furnished and the improvements were made by the construction company, under its contract, to the value of the same, in case of a sale; that he has no adequate remedy at law
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature