Hopkins v. Hudson

• Decision Date: 25 June 1886
• Citation: 107 Ind. 191,8 N.E. 91
• Parties: Hopkins and others v. Hudson and others.
• Court: Indiana Supreme Court

107 Ind. 191

8 N.E. 91

Hopkins and others

v.Hudson and others.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

June 25, 1886.

Appeal from Warrick circuit court.

Gilchrist & De Bruler, for appellants. A. J. Rutledge and W. M. Hoggatt, for appellees.

Mitchell, J.

William Hudson and 55 others joined in an action against Charles F. Hopkins and others, to recover certain sums due each of the plaintiffs from one Irby W. Poor, who was also a defendant, for work done in a coal mine of which Poor was the lessee. The specific relief asked against the appellants was the enforcement of an alleged lien on certain fixtures, machinery, and other property belonging to them, and which had been leased and used by Poor in connection with the mine. The complaint alleged that the appellants owned certain real estate in Warrick county, and that they had leased a coal mine, situate thereon, to John D. Love and another for a term of five years from February 1, 1880. The lease, by various assignments, the complaint alleged, had been finally transferred to Poor, who operated the mine during the months of March and April in the year 1884. During these months, Poor became indebted to the several plaintiffs, who were his employes, working in the mines, in various sums, for the amount of which, each within 60 days from the time the work was done, gave notice, as the law required, of his intention to hold a lien on the coal mine, machinery, fixtures, and property of every description which was used in and about the operating of the mines. A demurrer was overruled to the complaint. Hopkins and the other appellants answered that they were the owners in fee of the land on which the mine was situate, and the absolute owners of all the property described in the complaint, and upon which the plaintiffs were seeking to enforce a lien. They averred that, being so the owners, they had leased the mine, machinery, and fixtures, as alleged in the complaint, for a period of five years from February 1, 1880, to February 1, 1885, and that upon the expiration of the lease they had taken possession of the mine, and other property pertaining thereto, as their own. The answer further avers that the appellants were the sole owners of the property sought to be affected by the alleged lien since a date long anterior to the claim of the plaintiffs; that the appellants never employed any of the plaintiffs to work for them; that they had nothing to do with the operating of the mine during the time the plaintiffs were employed therein; and that all the work on account of which the liens are claimed, was rendered to Poor while he was operating the mine as lessee, and who had no other interest in it, or the machinery and fixtures, except as such lessee. The court sustained a demurrer to this answer. Such further proceedings were had as resulted in a decree foreclosing the alleged lien on the machinery, etc.

The question for consideration arises upon the complaint and answer, and is this: Does the lien created by section 5471, Rev. St. 1881, in favor of persons employed in and about coal mines, attach to and bind the estate of the owner of the mine, machinery, fixtures, etc., without regard to the fact that such owner may have leased the whole to another, who hired the employes, and from whom the wages sought to be made a lien are due, and who had, at the time the laborers were employed and the work done, no other interest in the property except that of a lessee? The appellants contend that it does not. The appellees have not favored us with a brief.

That part of the section above referred to, which creates the lien, is as follows: “In all coal mines in this state the miners and other persons employed and working in and about the mines, and the owners of the land, and others interested in the rental or royalty on the coal mined therein, shall have a lien on said mine, and all machinery and fixtures connected therewith, including scales, coal-bank cars, and everything used in and about the mine, for work and labor performed within two months, and the owner of the land, for royalty on coal taken out from under his land, for any length of time not exceeding two months,” etc. The section provides further that such liens shall have priority over all others, except that of the state for taxes, and that the lien for labor shall have priority over that for royalty. It also makes provision for giving notice of an intention to hold a lien by filing a written notice in the recorder's office.

A consideration of this section discloses that a lien is...