Hendrix v. Gold Ridge Mines, Inc., 6221

• Decision Date: 17 January 1936
• Docket Number: 6221
• Citation: 56 Idaho 326,54 P.2d 254
• Parties: ELI HENDRIX, Respondent, v. GOLD RIDGE MINES, INC., a Corporation, Defendant, And ERIK JANSON and JACOB JANSON, Appellants
• Court: Idaho Supreme Court

54 P.2d 254

56 Idaho 326

ELI HENDRIX, Respondent, v. GOLD RIDGE MINES, INC., a Corporation, Defendant, And ERIK JANSON and JACOB JANSON, Appellants

No. 6221

Supreme Court of Idaho

January 17, 1936

MINES AND MINING-CONTRACT OF SALE-LEASE-MECHANICS' LIEN-RIGHT TO LIEN-FORECLOSURE-INTEREST-ATTORNEYS' FEE ON APPEAL-STATUTES.

1. Contract which required vendor to convey gold mining property to purchaser upon purchaser's payment of purchase price and which did not require vendor to exercise option to terminate contract upon purchaser's failure to make payments, and which gave purchaser no option to refuse to take property and pay purchase price, held "contract of sale" and not "lease."

2. Purchaser of gold mining property under contract of sale requiring purchaser to have certain work performed on property held "agent" of vendor, entitling laborers employed to do work by purchaser to file liens on property (I. C. A., sec. 44-501).

3. Laborer is entitled to protection afforded by lien statute whether or not he knew terms of statute when he commenced working (I. C. A., secs. 44-501 to 44-516).

4. In action to foreclose mechanics' liens filed against mining property, refusal to admit parol evidence of negotiations to eliminate provision of contract of sale requiring purchaser to have certain work performed on property held not error (I C. A., secs. 44-501 to 44-516).

5. Claims of laborers who were entitled to credits for payments and offsets were "open accounts" which did not draw interest until expiration of three months from date of last item (I. C. A., sec. 26-1904, as amended by Laws 1933, chap 196, sec. 1).

6. Interest on lien claims of laborers for money due on open accounts would not be allowed from date of finishing work although interest would be allowed after expiration of three months from date of last item and not merely after entry of judgment (I. C. A., secs. 44-501 to 44-516, and sec. 26-1904, as amended by Laws 1933, chap. 197, sec. 1).

7. The interest statute is dealing with the subject of money due on contracts, either express or implied, and applies as well to unsettled and disputed accounts as to those where the specific sum due is fixed and determined.

8. Omission of provision in lien statute copied from California for collection of attorney's fees in Supreme Court held to show that such provision was not intended to apply in Idaho (I. C. A., sec. 44-513).

9. Lien statute held to authorize collection of attorney's fees only in district court and not in Supreme Court (I. C. A., sec. 44-513).

APPEAL from the District Court of the Tenth Judicial District, for Idaho County. Hon. Miles S. Johnson, Judge.

Action to foreclose miners' liens. Judgment for plaintiff. Affirmed with partial modification.

Judgment affirmed in part.

Paris Martin, for Appellants.

The owner's interest in the mining claims is not, by such an agreement, made lienable for work done at the instance of his tenant, unless, by some additional act, understanding or arrangement, he causes the work to be done, or makes the tenant his agent. (Nicholson v. Smith, 31 Idaho 544, 174 P. 1008; Smith v. Beebe, 31 Idaho 469, 174 P. 608; Steel v. Argentine Min. Co., 4 Idaho 505, 42 P. 585, 95 Am. St. 144; Settle v. Winters, 2 Idaho 215, 10 P. 216; Block v. Murray, 12 Mont. 545, 31 P. 550.)

A miner working in a mine and looking to one having an option for the purchase of the property for his compensation may not enforce a lien on the property against the owner. (Street v. Hazzard, 27 Cal.App. 263, 149 P. 770.)

In order to properly construe a contract between the parties, the court should have admitted evidence showing the surrounding conditions and circumstances at the time of making the contract. (Harris v. Faris-Kesl Construction Co., 13 Idaho 211, 89 P. 760; Julietta Tram. Co. v. Vollmer, 4 Idaho 408, 39 P. 1115; Wertheimer v. Thompson, 3 Idaho 560, 32 P. 205.)

Interest is not allowable on unliquidated claims until after the date of judgment. (Kaye v. Bank of Louisville, 9 Dana (Ky.), 261; Storey & Fawcett v. Nampa & Mer. Irr. Dist., 32 Idaho 713, 187 P. 946.)

Cox & Ware, for Respondent.

In the foreclosure of a labor lien the court is required by statute to allow a reasonable attorney fee. (Sec. 44-513, I. C. A.; sec. 1195, Kerr's Code Civ. Proc.; San Joaquin L. Co. v. Welton, (1896) 115 Cal. 1, 46 P. 735, 1057; Sweeney v. Meyer, (1899) 124 Cal. 512, 57 P. 479; West Coast L. Co. v. Newkirk, (1889) 80 Cal. 275, 22 P. 231.)

The interest of the appellants, Erik Janson and Jacob Janson, as well as the interest of the Gold Ridge Mines, Inc., in the mining property involved in this action is subject to the eight labor liens upon which this suit is based if the defendant, Gold Ridge Mines, Inc., was in possession and in charge of said mining property with permission or authority from the Jansons, provided, however, that the relation between the Jansons and the company was not that of lessor and lessee only. (Sec. 44-501, I. C. A.; Settle v. Winters, (1886) 2 Idaho 215, 10 P. 216; Steel v. Argentine Min. Co., (1895) 4 Idaho 505, 42 P. 585, 95 Am. St. 144; Nicholson v. Smith, (1918) 31 Idaho 544, 174 P. 1008.)

The interest of the appellants, Erik Janson and Jacob Janson, as well as the interest of the Gold Ridge Mines, Inc., in the mining property involved in this action is subject to the eight labor liens upon which this suit is based if the relation between the Jansons and the defendant corporation was that of vendor and vendee or rather if the defendant corporation was in possession under an assignment of a vendee's interest in the property, recognized by the vendors. (Sec. 44-501, I. C. A.; Pierce v. Blair, (1925) 196 Ind. 710, 148 N.E. 414, 149 N.E. 560; Hines v. Miller, (1898) 122 Cal. 517, 55 P. 401; Pike v. Empfield, (1912) 21 Colo. App. 161.)

The interest of the appellants, Erik Janson and Jacob Janson, as well as the interest of the Gold Ridge Mines, Inc., in the mining property involved in this action is subject to the eight labor liens upon which this suit is based if the agreement under which the defendant corporation was in possession is construed to be a lease or the relationship between the Jansons and the defendant corporation is construed to be that of lessor and lessee and by the terms of the lease the corporation was required to perform certain specified work on the property. (Sec. 44-501, I. C. A.; Nicholson v. Smith, supra; Gem State Lumber Co. v. Union Grain & Elevator Co., (1929) 47 Idaho 747, 278 P. 775.)

The defendant, Gold Ridge Mines, Inc., was clearly in possession and in charge of the mining property involved in this suit as statutory agent of the appellants Janson within the meaning of our lien laws. (Sec. 44-501, I. C. A.; Post v. Fleming, (1900) 10 N.M. 476, 62 P. 1087; Higgins v. Carlotta Gold Min. Co., (1906) 148 Cal. 700, 84 P. 758, 113 Am. St. 344; McClung v. Paradise Gold Min. Co., (1913) 164 Cal. 517, 129 P. 774.)

The trial court did not err in allowing interest on the money due under the labor liens. (Sec. 26-1904 (2), I. C. A.; Storey & Fawcett v. Nampa & Meridian Irr. Dist., (1920) 32 Idaho 713, at 719, 187 P. 946; 40 C. J. 263, 264, secs. 325, 326.)

AILSHIE, J. Givens, C. J., concurs, Budge, J., concurs in conclusion. Morgan and Holden, JJ., did not sit at the hearing and took no part in the decision of this case.

OPINION

AILSHIE, J.

Respondent Hendrix commenced this action for the foreclosure of eight liens filed against mining claims, under the Mechanics' Lien Law, I. C. A., secs. 44-501 to 44-516. One of the causes of action was to foreclose his own claim and the other seven were assigned claims from other workmen. The action is prosecuted against Erik Janson and Jacob Janson as the owners of the property and against the Gold Ridge Mines, Inc., which was in possession of and working the property and employed the laborers whose liens are sought to be foreclosed. A decree of foreclosure was entered in favor of the plaintiff on all the claims alleged. The Jansons have appealed from the judgment.

The decision of this case turns upon the contracts, under which the defendant Gold Ridge Mines, Inc., came into possession of, and was working and operating, the property.

On August 15, 1932, the Jansons entered into a contract with Scandia Gold Co., reciting that they, as "parties of the first part hereby agree to sell and convey to said party of the second part and said party of the second part hereby agrees to buy for a total consideration of the sum of $ 50,000," the property thereinafter described and known as the "Snowshoe Mines." The contract also provided for a down payment of $ 550 and six monthly payments of $ 200 each and larger installments commencing with the first of March, 1933. The contract then provides:

"A copy of this agreement shall be deposited with the Bank of Camas Prairie of Grangeville, Idaho, as escrow agent. After the March 1st payment is made by said party of the second part, said parties of the first part agree to deposit with said escrow agent a good and sufficient mining deed conveying said premises to said party of the second part," etc.

The contract further recites the escrow conditions and instructions to the bank and that the purchasers shall be forthwith let into possession of the premises and be entitled to work and operate the same. Paragraph 5 of the contract provides:

"Said party of the second part shall immediately begin preparation to complete the objective tunnel on said property to tap the ore body approximately two hundred feet deeper than the present workings and said tunnel shall be completed in one year from the date hereof. Any and all work done in and upon said premises during the life of this agreement shall be done in first...