Rieflin v. Grafton

Citations

• 63 Wash. 387
• 115 P. 851
• 1911 Wash. LEXIS 1212

Syllabus

<p>Mechanics’ Liens — Notice of Claim — Time fob Filing — “Cessation” — Replacing Defective Material. The date of “cessation of the furnishing” of material for a building, within Rem. & Bal. Code, § 1134, requiring claims to be filed within 90 days therefrom, is the date on which the materialman on demand of the. owner replaced defective material rejected by the architect, where the materialman acted in good faith and not for the purpose of prolonging the time.</p> <p>Same — Foreclosure — Findings — Conclusions of Law. Where the architect rejected material and the owner demanded that the materialman replace it, which was done, a finding that it was “not done in performance of the original contract,” is an unwarranted conclusion of law.</p> <p>Same — Duplicate Statements to Owner. Rem. & Bal. Code, § 1133, requiring a materialman to deliver to the owner a duplicate statement of the supplies delivered to any person or contractor for the construction of a building, does not apply to materials delivered to the owner.</p> <p>Same — Foreclosure—Defenses—Damages. Upon the foreclosure of a materialman’s lien for materials furnished to and accepted by the contractor, the owner must look to the contractor for any damage resulting from defective material put in the building.</p>