Skip to main content
· 2/24/1897

Maryland Brick Co. v. Dunkerly

Citations

  • 85 Md. 199
  • 36 A. 761
  • 1897 Md. LEXIS 32

Syllabus

<p>Mechanics' Liens— Time of Filing■ — Materials Supplied at Intervals Under Continuous Contract — Materials Not Used in the Buildings — Release of Part of the Property— Waiver of Lien.</p> <p>A material man contracted-to supply a builder with bricks for the erection of twenty houses at certain prices, no definite quantity being stipulated for. The bricks were supplied at intervals from November to May following, and the next delivery was in August. In May bricks were ordered and delivered for paving purposes, at a different price from either of those named in the contract. The lien claimed was filed within six months after the August delivery. Held,</p> <p>ist. That the bricks, with the exception of those ordered for paving purposes, were all supplied under one continuous contract, and the claim was filed in due time, under Code, Art. 63, sec. 23.</p> <p>2nd. That the paving bricks were furnished under a separate contract, and cannot be allowed as part of the lien claimed, having been supplied more than six months before the lien was filed.</p> <p>It is not necessary for a lien claimant to show that the articles supplied by him were actually used in the construction of the building, provided it be shown that under the contract they were furnished for that purpose.</p> <p>Where there is an entire contract between material man and builder for the supply of materials for the erection of a number of houses, and after some of the materials are furnished, the material man releases from his lien claim some of the houses, he cannot claim a lien against the other houses for materials actually used in the houses so released, but the burden of showing that the materials were so used rests upon the parties seeking to avoid the lien, and in the absence of such proof the material man is entitled to maintain his lien against the other houses for the materials supplied by him.</p> <p>It was claimed on one side and denied on the other that the material men in this case had signed a

Judges: Boyd, Briscoe, Bryan, Fowler, McSherry, Russum

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.