Reed v. Horton
| Decision Date | 24 November 1916 |
| Docket Number | 20,164 - (82) |
| Citation | 159 N.W. 1080,135 Minn. 17 |
| Parties | E. A. REED v. LAURENCE E. HORTON AND OTHERS |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Action in the district court for Ramsey county to recover $204.86 for labor and materials furnished and to foreclose a lien for the same upon a motor vehicle. The case was tried before Olin B. Lewis, J., who made findings as set out in the first paragraph of the opinion. From an order denying his motion for a new trial, plaintiff appealed. Affirmed.
Lien -- repair of motor vehicle -- lien statement.
Where upon different dates and as separate transactions, labor or material is furnished for the repair of a motor vehicle, a single lien statement may be filed therefor, provided the item first furnished was so furnished within 60 days of the date of filing the statement.
George G. Chapin, for appellant.
Charles A. Lethert, for respondents.
Between December 3, 1914, and October 11, 1915, plaintiff, at various times, furnished material and labor in repairing an automobile in the possession of a conditional vendee. In all some 16 tires were furnished. A number of inner tubes were also furnished and repaired. A lien statement was filed on November 15, 1915, under the provisions of sections 7053-7057, G.S. 1913. The action is to foreclose this lien. The conditional vendors, whose contract was duly filed October 14, 1914, are the respondents. The court found that the different items of appellant's account "represent separate and distinct purchases and transactions on the different dates therein set forth," and permitted a lien, superior to respondents' conditional sale contract, only for the items furnished during the 60 days next prior to the filing of the lien. Appellant insists that, since there never was an interval of 60 days between the furnishing of any one item and the next, the whole account constitutes one lien and was preserved by filing the claim therefor within 60 days after furnishing the last item in the account. This is the only question before us. The conditional vendors not having appealed, we do not consider or pass upon the question whether a lien for motor vehicle repairs takes precedence over a prior mortgage or vendors' conditional contract duly filed before the repairs are furnished.
The sections above referred to give a lien upon a motor vehicle for labor contributed and materials furnished in making repairing, storing or otherwise caring for the vehicle at the request of the owner or his agent. Owner includes a conditional vendee and a mortgagor in possession. We think the trial court held correctly that, when the repairs for such a vehicle are furnished at different times and constitute separate and distinct transactions, the right to claim a lien expires 60 days after each transaction. It cannot be conceived that the...
To continue reading
Request your trial