Northern Concrete Pipe, Inc v. Sinacola Companies—midwest, Inc

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the plaintiff’s construction lien was untimely when, even though the plaintiff submitted the required notice within the statutorily required period, the notice was returned twice for correction and, ultimately, accepted after the statutorily required period
• finding that lien mailed to Oakland County Register of Deeds twice and twice returned because of incomplete legal description was not “accepted” by the register of deeds until the complete legal description was included
• “As an exception, [the. substantial compliance] provision should not be interpreted to nullify altogether the general rule that statutes should be interpreted consistent with their plain and unambiguous meaning.”
• “a lien must be filed within ninety days after the last date when materials or services are supplied,” and “[a]bsent strict compliance with the ninety-day filing requirement of MCL 570.1111(1) . . . .”
• whether a mechanic's lien is in substantial compliance with statutory requirements depends, among other things, on an examination of whether it satisfies the purposes of the statute and the potential for prejudice or unfairness

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).