Hovey v. Town of E. Providence

• Decision Date: 05 July 1890
• Citation: 17 R.I. 80,20 A. 205
• Parties: HOVEY v. TOWN OF EAST PROVIDENCE.
• Court: Rhode Island Supreme Court

20 A. 205

17 R.I. 80

HOVEY

v. TOWN OF EAST PROVIDENCE.

Supreme Court of Rhode Island.

July 5, 1890.

Exceptions to master's report.

Petition by Fred. E. Hovey, as agent, etc., against the town of East Providence.

George J. West, for petitioner, Ed ward C. Dubois, for respondent.

DURFEE, C. J. This is a petition for the enforcement of a mechanic's lien against a lot of land belonging to the defendant town, and all the buildings and improvements thereon, for materials furnished for and used in the erection of a school-house thereon, the materials having been furnished to the contractors. The question is raised whether such a ten is enforceable against a house and lot held by a town for the uses of a public school. In 2 Jones, Liens, § 1375, the law is stated to be as follows, to-wit: "On grounds of public policy, the mechanic's lien laws do not, in the absence of express provisions, apply to public buildings erected by states, counties, and towns for public uses. School-houses erected for the use of public schools come within this exemption. Such buildings are exempt from attachment, and from sale upon execution, and for the same reason are exempt from liens which might result in an adverse sale." The law is laid down in Phil. Liens, § 179, and in 2 Dill. Mun. Corp. § 577, in the same manner, with copious citation of cases, and among them several in which the law as stated has been applied to public school lots and houses. Abercrombie v. Ely, 60 Mo. 23; Hastings v. Woods, 2 Mo. App. 148; Board v. Heidelberger, 78 Ill. 58; Quinn v. Allen, 85 Ill. 39; Fat out v. Commissioners, 102 Ind. 223,1 N. E. Rep. 389; Brinckerhoff v. Board, 37 How. Pr. 499; Williams v. Controllers, 18 Pa. St. 275. It is easy to see what detriment might follow if lands and buildings held for public uses, as for instance for parks, courthouses, jails, town halls, or common schools, could be sold to satisfy the debts or defaults of municipal corporations having the legal title. The public uses would be thereby annihilated. Courts have presumed that this could not have been intended, and accordingly have decided, as a matter of public policy, that lands or buildings so held are not subject to mechanics' liens. We see no satisfactory reason why we should not follow these precedents. Our statutes recognize that there is property which is exempt from seizure on execution by public policy. Pub. St. R. I. c. 209, § 4, cl. 14. Our statutes do not permit executions to run against the...