Daugherty v. Gunther
| Decision Date | 01 December 1915 |
| Docket Number | 12907. |
| Citation | 88 Wash. 378,153 P. 336 |
| Parties | DAUGHERTY et al. v. GUNTHER et al. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Department 2. Appeal from Superior Court, King County; Mitchell Gilliam, Judge.
Action by S. N. Daugherty and another against George Gunther and others. From a judgment for defendants, plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.
S. S. Langland, of Seattle, for appellants.
Plaintiffs' complaint sought to foreclose an asserted lien on lands for 'surveying, placing stakes and monuments, and figuring out distances for the platting of said real estate.' A demurrer being sustained, they elected to stand on their complaint, and have appealed.
The decision of the lower court was correct. We incline, to be sure, and are required, to give lien laws a liberal interpretation, and this we do. But in the present instance we are asked to go too far. A civil engineer is clearly not within this statute. He is not within the clause 'otherwise improves the same.'
We may add that it was not alleged that this surveying and staking was even part of any subsequent construction or grading, or that anything followed to make it useful. Under the building lien law we did allow architects a lien ( Gould v. McCormick, 75 Wash. 61, 134 P. 676, 47 L. R. A. [N. S.] 765, Ann. Cas. 1915A, 710) for plans of the building actually constructed, denying it to them in Lipscomb v. Exchange National Bank, 80 Wash. 296, 141 P. 686, because the structure in that case had never been erected. To give to mere staking and running of lines a lienable interest in lands is beyond the statute.
Judgment affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Raffel v. Perley
...675, 681, 98 So.2d 435 (1957) (preparing maps and placing stakes to mark boundary lines not within lien statute). Daugherty v. Gunther, 88 Wash. 378, 378-379, 153 P. 336 (1915) (survey unrelated to subsequent construction not within lien statute), compare Smith v. Dekraay, 217 Or. 436, 446,......
-
Gollehon, Schemmer & Associates, Inc. v. Fairway-Bettendorf Associates
...Loan Assn., 51 Cal.App.3d 453, 124 Cal.Rptr. 221 (1975); Buckingham v. Flummerfelt, 15 N.D. 112, 106 N.W. 403 (1906); Daugherty v. Gunther, 88 Wash. 378, 153 P. 336 (1915). See also Anderson v. Breezy Point Estates, 283 Minn. 490, 168 N.W.2d 693 Cases relied on by plaintiff are distinguisha......
-
Mazel v. Bain
...clears, grades, fills or otherwise improves real property or any street or road in front of or adjoining the same. See Daugherty v. Gunther, 88 Wash. 378, 153 P. 336. In Wilkinson v. Rowe, supra, this court further 'Here, we are concerned with a remedy given by statute for work done on an i......
-
Wilkinson v. Rowe
...and drawing a contract for construction of the building are not labor for which a mechanic's lien may be claimed.' In Daugherty v. Gunther, 88 Wash. 378, 153 P. 336, the court 'Plaintiffs' complaint sought to foreclose an asserted lien on lands for 'surveying, placing stakes and monuments, ......