Stetson & Post Lumber Co. v. W. & J. Sloane Co.

Citations

• 61 Wash. 180
• 112 P. 248
• 1910 Wash. LEXIS 1311

Syllabus

<p>Mechanics’ Liens — Notice oe Claim — Amendment—Limitations. Upon the trial of an action to foreclose a mechanics’ lien, a notice of a lien against the entire premises may be amended to claim a lien against the leasehold interest only of one who was alleged to have an unknown interest or lien upon the property; and it is immaterial that the amendment was made after the time for filing such a lien had expired, amendments being liberally allowed in all cases by Rem. & Bal. Code, §§ 1134, 1147, regardless of such limitations.</p> <p>Same — Buildings—What Constitutes — Fixtures. A structure is of such a permanent and substantial nature as to be lienable for materials used in the “construction and erection of the building,” where it appears that the first tenant of a new store building was given consent to and did build a mezzo or balcony floor commencing at the rear of the storeroom, extending about forty feet toward the front, and from side wall to side wall, connected with the lower floor by a stairway, the floor being upon girders supported by uprights, it being impossible to say how the fastening was made to the side walls or the lower floor without a prying apart; although as between landlord and tenant it may have been viewed as a trade fixture.</p> <p>Mechanics’ Liens — Foreclosure—Pleading—Variance. It is not a fatal variance for a mechanics’ lien notice to claim a lien for the construction and erection of a building, and to prove an alteration or improvement of a new building by the addition of a mezzo or balcony floor, where the party could not have been actually misled to his prejudice, within Rem. & Bal. Code, § 299, which is applicable to lien cases; especially where the building had never been occupied and the ■contractor may have taken it to be part of the original plan.</p>