McConnell v. Meridian Sash & Blind Factory

• Decision Date: 12 November 1896
• Citation: McConnell v. Meridian Sash & Blind Factory, 112 Ala. 582, 20 So. 929 (Ala. 1896)
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court
• Parties: MCCONNELL v. MERIDIAN SASH & BLIND FACTORY.

20 So. 929

112 Ala. 582

MCCONNELL v. MERIDIAN SASH & BLIND FACTORY.

Supreme Court of Alabama

November 12, 1896

Appeal from city court of Birmingham; W. W. Wilkerson, Judge.

Action by the Meridian Sash & Blind Factory against H. L. McConnell and others. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant McConnell appeals. Reversed.

This was a suit instituted by the appellee against the appellant and certain named contractors to recover an amount alleged to be due the plaintiff for material furnished to the contractors, and used by them in building a house for H. L McConnell, the owner, and for the establishment of a material man's lien upon the property. The suit was filed and the remedy sought to be enforced under the provisions of the mechanic's and material man's lien law, as passed by the legislature in the term of 1890-91 (Acts 1890-91, p 578). In the complaint it was not averred or shown that the statement filed in the probate office for the establishment of the lien was verified by affidavit of the claimant, or of some person having knowledge of the facts. The complaint was demurred to upon many grounds, among which was the following "(13) The averments show that the statement filed was not verified by affidavit." The demurrer to the complaint was overruled. It is not deemed necessary, under the opinion in the present appeal, to set out the facts in detail. Upon the hearing of all the evidence, the court tried the cause without the intervention of a jury, and rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiff. The defendant appeals and assigns as error the several rulings of the trial court to which exceptions were reserved.

Smyer & Smyer, for appellant.

Arnold & Evans, for appellee.

BRICKELL C.J.

Liens of the character here sought to be enforced are dependent for their validity upon a strict compliance, in all matters of substance, with the provisions of the statutes from which they derive their existence. Corrugating Co. v Thacher, 87 Ala. 458, 6 So. 366; Leftwich Lumber Co. v. Florence Mut. Building, Loan & Savings Ass'n (Ala.) 18 So. 48, 51. By section 3022 of the Code, it is made necessary that the person claiming the lien should, within a given time, file in the office of the judge of probate "a statement in writing verified by the oath of the claimant or some other person having knowledge of the facts," etc. A statement was filed by the appellee within the prescribed time, but it was not...