Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

A.C. Construction Co. v. Kehoe

Decided: October 28, 1992.

A.C. CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
INEKE KEHOE, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT



On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Burlington County.

King, Brody and Thomas. The opinion of the court was delivered by Brody, J.A.D.

Brody

[260 NJSuper Page 60] Plaintiff appeals, on leave granted, from an interlocutory order that (1) invalidated its contractor's lien based upon a filed construction contract and (2) extinguished "all derivative stop notices."*fn1 Plaintiff is a building contractor; defendant is the owner of real property on which plaintiff constructed a substantial part of defendant's new home. The underlying dispute is

over the amount, if any, due under the contract and the amount, if any, due for modifications and extras.

No evidence was submitted on defendant's motion, there was no oral argument and the trial Judge neither made findings nor gave reasons for granting the motion. We are left to surmise the facts from allegations in the pleadings, and to infer the Judge's reasoning from arguments in the memoranda submitted to him on the motion.

Plaintiff agreed by written contract to build the home for $717,511. It alleges in its complaint that defendant also authorized, we assume orally, "changes, deletions, and additions," construction of a barn on the property, and "preparation of the site." The sum due for these modifications and extras allegedly totals $219,536, the amount plaintiff seeks to recover in this action. Defendant had paid plaintiff $660,000 before suit. We are unable to determine from the record which items in the written contract were allegedly modified orally.

The contract, dated May 21, 1990, was filed in the county clerk's office on May 30, 1990. Plaintiff performed some work on the property, how much cannot be determined from the record, prior to the filing date. Relying on the filed contract, two suppliers filed stop notices rather than mechanics' notices of intention. The trial Judge appears to have accepted defendant's argument that the written contract did not constitute a lien on the real estate -- and the stop notices therefore are of no effect -- simply because plaintiff began work on the job before the contract was filed. We disagree.

Those who furnish labor or supply materials to a construction site may secure payment by acquiring a lien on the real estate pursuant to the Mechanics' Lien Law. N.J.S.A. 2A:44-64 to -124. With one exception, the mechanics' lien is routinely available to those who file in the county clerk's office a mechanic's notice of intention (MNI) to assert the lien for labor to be furnished or materials to be supplied. N.J.S.A. 2A:44-71. The exception, limited in scope, applies only to labor

furnished or materials supplied pursuant to a written construction contract after the contract has been filed in the county clerk's office. Once the contract has been filed, only the contractor named in the contract may acquire a lien for later supplied labor or materials. Except as noted below, others who thereafter furnish labor or supply materials pursuant to the filed contract may not acquire a lien against the realty for such labor or materials but, by filing a stop notice with the county clerk and serving a copy on the owner, may look to the owner for payment out of funds due the contractor under the contract. N.J.S.A. 2A:44-75 to -77.

Defendant contends that under N.J.S.A. 2A:44-75 the exclusive contractor's lien does not come into effect unless the contract is filed before anyone performs any labor or furnishes any materials pursuant to the contract. The statute provides in relevant part:

If a building is erected . . . under a written contract, . . . the building and the land on which it stands shall . . . be liable to the lien of the contractor alone for labor performed or materials furnished pursuant to the contract, if the contract . . ., before the labor is performed or materials furnished, [is] filed with the proper county clerk . . . .*fn2

The statute creates the exclusive contractor's lien only as to labor performed or materials furnished after the contract is filed. Where some of the labor has been performed or some of the materials ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.