Perry v. Cox
| Decision Date | 30 October 1912 |
| Citation | 159 N.C. 676,76 S.E. 7 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | WEATHERS & PERRY . v. COX et al. |
Mechanics' Liens (§ 58*)—Improvement by Lessee—Lien on Lessor's Interest.
Revisal 1905, § 2016, declaring every building improved shall be subject to a lien for payment of all debts contracted for work done on it or material furnished, gives one a lien only on the property of one who is his debtor, and so gives one contracting with a lessee for improvement of the leased property no lien on the lessor's interest; the recorded lease, providing for the lessee making the improvement, stipulating that the lessor should not be chargeable for any contracts or liabilities of the lessee.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Mechanics' Liens, Cent. Dig. §§ 72, 73; Dec. Dig. § 58.*]
Appeal from Superior Court, Wake County; Bragaw, Judge.
Action by Weathers & Perry, a copartnership composed of L. C. Weathers and another, against Francis Cox and others, commenced in a justice's court, and appealed to the superior court, where there was judgment for defendants, and plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.
The plaintiff filed his complaint, amended by leave of court, stating his cause of action and his claim for a lien on the premises, in effect as follows: That on September 15, 1909, the owners of the property conveyed same to Grand Theater Company, by written lease, for the term of ten years, with privilege of renewal for five additional years, at a stated and increasing rental per annum, with a clause giving the landlords a lien for the rent and one of forfeiture in case of nonpayment. There was a provision in the lease that the lessees were to construct or erect on the premises, for use in their business, a theater and auditorium, to cost not less than $6,000, and a covenant, on the part of the lessees, that at the termination of the lease the improvements on the property should belong to the lessors, the owners of the property, and the contract contained, further, the following stipulation: "(10) It is mutually understood between the party of the first part and the party of the second part that the party of the second part shall have leave to make improvements upon the auditorium building, but not to make any alterations or changes that will tend to decrease the value of or in any way damage said building, and, further, that the party of the first part shall be in no wise chargeable for any contracts or liabilities, whether arising from negligence or otherwise, of the said Grand Theater Company." Said lease having been duly registered according to law, the property was put in possession of the lessees, the Grand Theater Company, who proceeded to construct the auditorium and improve the premises, pursuant to the terms. Plaintiffs had an unpaid claim, amounting to about $100, for plastering and papering the hall, under a contract with the Grand Theater Company; and the said company, the lessees, having become insolvent, and the lease forfeited for nonpayment of rent, plaintiffs instituted this action against the lessors, the owners of the property, to recover the amount due and to enforce same as a valid lien against the landlord's ownership and interest A demurrer to demand, as stated, was sustained by the court, and plaintiffs excepted and appealed.
T. H. Calvert, of Raleigh, for appellants.
Jones & Bailey, of Raleigh, for appellees.
Our statute relating to the question presented (Revisal, § 2016) is in terms as follows: And the decisions with us have...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ranlo Supply Co. v. Clark
...Co., 199 N.C. 373, 154 S.E. 628; Charlotte Pipe & Foundry Co. v. Southern Aluminum Co., 172 N.C. 704, 90 S.E. 923; Weathers & Perry v. Cox, 159 N.C. 575, 76 S.E. 7; Boone v. Chatfield, 118 N.C. 916, 24 S.E. 745; Wilkie v. Bray, 71 N.C. The evidence unequivocally establishes the fact that th......
- State's Prison v. Bros
- State's Prison v. Hoffman & Bros.
- Brown v. Ward, 676.