Shannon v. Philadelphia German Protestant Home for the Aged

Citations

• 16 Pa. Super. 250
• 1901 Pa. Super. LEXIS 53

Syllabus

<p>Mechanics' liens — Subcontractors—Covenant against liens — Act of June 26, 1895, P. L. 869.</p> <p>The act of June 26, 1895, relating to mechanics’ liens made no attempt to take away from the parties to the original contract the power to covenant that no lien should be filed for work done or materials furnished in the erection of a building. It merely regulated the manner in which the right of lien might be denied to subcontractors.</p> <p>The legislative intent as disclosed by the act was to require that in order to exclude a subcontractor from the right of lien, that exclusion must necessarily result from the express covenants of the contract, and not from any principle or implication of law, limiting the rights of such subcontractors to those which might be asserted by the principal contractor.</p> <p>The act clearly distinguishes between the claims of contractors and those of subcontractors, and, since it went into effect, a covenant by the contractor that he himself will not file a lien cannot be held specifically to covenant against liens by subcontractors.</p> <p>Mechanics' liens — Covenants against liens by subcontractors — Contract— Act of June 26, 1895, P. L. 369.</p> <p>In order to warrant the court in holding that a covenant for liens in a building contract applies to subcontractors, it must so clearly appear that the covenant was intended to deny the right of lien to subcontractors that a mechanic or material man could have understood it without consulting a lawyer as to its legal effect.</p> <p>A building contract provided as follows: “ The contractor agrees not to lien or allow any lien or claim whatsoever to be filed against said building by himself, subcontractors or any one furnishing materials or labor on said building,” Another clause was as follows: “If at any time there shall be evidence of any lien or claim for which, if established, the owner or the said premises might become liable, and which is chargeable to the contractor, the owner sha