Stetson-Post Mill Co. v. Brown

Citations

• 21 Wash. 619
• 59 P. 507
• 1899 Wash. LEXIS 336

Syllabus

<p>MECHANICS’ LIENS — BUILDING ON LEASED PREMISES-WHEN LESSEE AGENT OP OWNER.</p> <p>Where a lessee of lands is accorded the privilege of erecting a building thereon, which shall become the property of the lessor on the termination of the tenancy, but the privilege is wholly optional with the lessee, and no enforceable contract exists whereby he is required to build, the fee cannot be subjected to mechanics’ liens incurred by the lessee, as the lessee can in no sense be held to be the agent of the owner, under the statutory provision (Bal. Code, § 5900) that every person performing labor upon, or furnishing material to be used in, the construction of buildings has a lien thereon, whether performed or furnished at the instance of the owner of the property or his agent; and that any person having charge of the construction, alteration or repair of any property subject to lien shall be held to be the agent of the owner for the purpose of the establishment of the liens. (Kremer v. Walton, 11 Wash. 120 and 16 Wash. 139, distinguished.)</p> <p>SAME — STATUTES—REPEAL.</p> <p>Laws 1893, ch. 24, p. 32 (Bal. Code, §§ 5900-5918), being a complete act upon the subject of liens of mechanics and material men, and providing in § 2 that if the person causing the construction, alteration or repair of any building own less than a fee simple in such land, then only his interest therein is subject to the lien, and the repealing clause being to the effect that all acts or parts of acts in conflict with its provisions are thereby repealed, it must be construed that the act of 1893 works a repeal of Gen. Stat. § 1671, which provides that should the owner of any land desire to prevent the lien from attaching, he may do so by giving notice in writing, posted in some conspicuous place upon said land or improvement, to the effect that he will not be responsible for said improvement.</p>