Bridwell v. Clark

• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
• Citation: 39 Mo. 170
• Parties: RICHARD F. BRIDWELL, Plaintiff in Error, v. HENRY L. CLARK, et als., Defendants in Error.
• Decision Date: 31 October 1866

39 Mo. 170

RICHARD F. BRIDWELL, Plaintiff in Error,
v.
HENRY L. CLARK, et als., Defendants in Error.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

October Term, 1866.

Error to St. Louis Land Court.

C. C. McLure, for plaintiff in error.

By the provisions of the mechanic's lien law for St. Louis county every mechanic who performs work or furnishes materials shall have a lien on the improvement for the work done and materials furnished and the ground on which the building is erected; and it matters not by whom he was employed to do such work and furnish the materials--Sess. Acts 1856-7, p. 668, § 1. This lien is preferred to all others subsequent to commencing the work--Id. p. 669, § 5.

Whether or not Lucas & Hunt's deeds of trust on the ground upon which the houses were built by plaintiff Bridwell are to be preferred to the mechanic's lien on the ground, yet there can be no doubt as to the mechanic's lien on the buildings alone; for the law intended to protect the mechanic who did the work and furnished the materials for the work done, &c., independent of the owner of the ground. If it were otherwise, why does the 1st section of the act referred to protect the builder in his lien on the buildings even when employed by any person who may not own the ground, or even have an interest in it?

It is plain that the mechanic's lien is protected on the improvements, at least by § 20. Where the improvements are erected on leasehold property, and the lessee fails to protect his lease, and the lessor comes into possession, the mechanic's lien holds the improvements, and the builder may recover the same--Sess. Acts 1856-7, p. 668, § 2. This principle applies in this case-- Gillespie v. Bradford, 7 Yerg. 168.

[39 Mo. 171]

The execution to support the lien is a special fieri facias, and may be levied on the real or personal property subject to its payment, or on the improvements as in this case--p. 670, § 14. The sales under Clark's deeds of trust to Lucas & Hunt's trustees make no change in plaintiff's rights; the sales were made after suit was commenced and after plaintiff's lien had attached.

Glover & Shepley, for defendants in error.

WAGNER, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

Plaintiff commenced his suit in the St. Louis Land Court against the defendants to enforce a mechanic's lien on certain property situated on Olive street. It appears that James H. Lucas and Ann L. Hunt conveyed to the defendant Clark a piece of ground on which the buildings were erected, for the purpose of having...