Central Trust Co. v. Sheffield & B. Coal, Iron & Ry. Co.

• Decision Date: 12 February 1890
• Citation: 42 F. 106
• Court: U.S. District Court — Northern District of Alabama
• Parties: CENTRAL TRUST CO. OF NEW YORK v. SHEFFIELD & B. COAL, IRON & RY. CO. et al.

42 F. 106

CENTRAL TRUST CO. OF NEW YORK v. SHEFFIELD & B. COAL, IRON & RY. CO. et al.

United States Circuit Court, N.D. Alabama, Northern Division.

February 12, 1890

Roquemore, White & McKenzie, for intervenor.

H. B Tompkins and Lawrence Cooper, for defendants.

Suit by the Central Trust Company of New York against the Sheffield &amp Birmingham Coal, Iron & Railway Company, and others. Intervention of the Watt Mining Car-Wheel Company.

PARDEE J.

The intervenor came into this court to have recognized and enforced a lien claimed on a certain coal mine, and on the machinery, equipment, and fixtures therein, especially on 240 coal-cars, all of which is in the custody of this court. Under a specific contract, the intervenor furnished to the owners of the mine cars specifically adapted for use in the mine; and for the furnishing and equipment thereof--

'It is agreed that said cars are now in use in said mine as a part of the equipment thereof, and are used to haul coal from where it is mined to the opening or mouth of the mine, upon an iron track; and they are propelled or drawn by machinery at the mouth of the mine, or pushed by hand, or drawn by mules, and are not adapted to any other use or transportation, or used in any other manner.'

The case shows that the laws of the state of Alabama with regard to recording a lien were complied with. In short, the joint answer of the complainant, defendant, and the receiver, to the intervention, admits the entire case as claimed for the intervenor except as to the lien. The intervention was referred to a special master to report upon the amount due, and as to the character and extent of intervenor's lien. The master has reported against the intervenor on the question of lien on the ground that a coal mine is not a building or improvement, within the meaning of section 3018, Code Ala. 1886. As a further reason for his report, the master doubts if the cars are such 'material,' 'fixtures,' or 'machinery' as come within the purview of the said statute. Intervenor's lien is claimed under section 3018, Code Ala. 1886, as follows:

'Every mechanic or other person who shall do or perform any work or labor upon, or furnish any material, fixtures, engine, boiler, or machinery for, any building or improvement on land, or for repairing the same, under or by virtue of any contract with the owner or proprietor thereof, or his agent, trustee, contractor, or sub-contractor, upon complying with the provision of this chapter shall have a lien therefor on such building or improvement, and on the land on which the same is situated,' etc.

The first question presented is whether or not the coal mine, as set forth and described in the intervention and exhibits, is such an improvement upon land as comes within the meaning of the statute just quoted; it being contended on one side that the word 'improvement' in the statute must be limited in its meaning to buildings and things ejusdem generis; in other words, that an improvement upon land which is not in the nature of a building is not an improvement within the meaning of the statute. On the other hand, it is claimed that, in the proper construction of the statute, the word 'improvement' is not at all limited by the word 'building' preceding it, but that it is to be taken as extending the class of constructions which may be the subject of a lien, rather than limiting such class. It is said that this point has never been settled by the jurisprudence of the state of Alabama, and is to that extent a new question. The question was before the supreme court of the state in the case of Iron-Works v. Dorman, 78 Ala. 218, but was not passed upon; the lien being defeated for failure in description of land subject to lien. An examination of the legislation and jurisprudence of the state with reference to this matter of liens will, however, decidedly aid in reaching a correct decision. Section 3101 of the Code of 1867 provides as follows:

'Mechanics and builders have a prior lien upon the tract, parcel, or lot of land on which buildings are erected by them, and on the buildings so erected, for the price agreed on, or compensation to be paid, and materials used in the construction thereof, unless surety be given to such builders for the performance of the contract, or an agreement be made, in writing, waiving the lien.'

In 1873, (Acts Ala. 1872-73, p. 117,) the said section 3101 of the Code of 1867 was amended so as to read as follows:

'Mechanics and builders have a prior lien upon the tract, parcel, or lot of land on which buildings, inclosures, or fixtures are erected by them, and on the buildings, inclosures, or fixtures for the price agreed upon, or compensation to be paid, and materials used in the construction thereof, unless there be an agreement in writing waiving the lien,' etc.

This act extended the cause of the lien from 'buildings' to 'buildings, inclosures, or fixtures,' and the subject of the lien from 'land' and 'buildings' to 'land,' 'buildings, inclosures, or fixtures.' In 1876, three years later the law was again amended so as to read as follows:

'Every mechanic or other person who shall do or perform any work or labor upon, or furnish any material, fixtures, engine, boiler, or machinery for, any building, erection, or improvement upon land, or for repairing the same, under or by virtue of any contract with the owner or proprietor thereof, or his agent, trustee, contractor, or subcontractor, upon complying with the provisions of this chapter shall have, for his work or labor done, or materials, fixtures, engine, boiler, or machinery furnished, a lien, to the extent and in the manner by this chapter provided, upon such building, erection, or improvements and upon the land belonging to such owner or proprietor, on which the same are situated, to the extent of one acre,' etc. Section 3440, Code Ala. 1876.

This act extended the subject of the lien from 'land,' 'buildings, inclosures, or fixtures' to 'land,' 'building, erection, or improvement.' The next change that seems to have been made in the law is made by section 3018 of the Code of 1886, supra, in which the statute last quoted is amended by striking out the word 'erection,' so that the statute reads, 'for any building or improvement on land,' and by further striking out the words, 'for his work or labor done, or materials fixtures, engine, boiler, or machinery furnished,' in that part of the section describing extent of the lien, so as to read, 'shall have a lien,' etc. The changes made at this time were in codifying, and do not appear to...