Rhone v. Barnes Co.

3 Citing cases

  1. Lyon v. Dunn

    402 A.2d 461 (Me. 1979)   Cited 5 times

    It is well established in this jurisdiction that a mechanic's lien, wholly statutory in origin, arises from the moment the first materials or services are furnished. See Pineland Lumber Co. v. Robinson, Me., 382 A.2d 33, 36 (1978); Withan v. Wing, 108 Me. 364, 373, 81 A. 100, 104 (1911). At that point, however, the lien is merely inchoate in nature, and will not ripen absent further action by the materialman.

  2. Pineland Lumber Co. v. Robinson

    382 A.2d 33 (Me. 1978)   Cited 24 times
    Concluding that acknowledging a statement to be the subscriber's "free act and deed" did not "constitute compliance with the verification requirement of [Maine's] materialmen's lien statute"

    Hence, the materialmen's lien, wholly of statutory origin, has its onset as such from the moment the materials furnished by the subcontractor are used in erecting, altering or repairing the building involved, provided the same is done by consent of the owner. See Witham v. Wing, 108 Me. 364, 373, 81 A. 100 (1911). But, at that stage the lien is inchoate only; and, where there is no privity of contract between the owner and the materialman, such lien will not ripen, but "shall be dissolved," unless the materialman records his lien-claim statement in the form provided by 10 M.R.S.A. § 3253 in the office of the register of deeds for the county in which the building is situated within the time fixed therein and unless he brings his action to enforce his lien within the time fixed by 10 M.R.S.A. § 3255.

  3. Usen v. Usen

    136 Me. 480 (Me. 1940)   Cited 21 times

    Objection cannot be made to an amended bill in equity by a demurrer to the bill in its original form. As was said in Witham v. Wing et al., 108 Me. 364, 81 A. 100: "If they had wished to object to the amended bill by demurrer, they should have filed a new demurrer to the amended bill."