Ricker v. Joy

• Decision Date: 03 March 1881
• Citation: 72 Me. 106
• Parties: ALBERT H. RICKER v. CHARLES E. JOY and dwelling house, S. P. HUNTRESS, claimant.
• Court: Maine Supreme Court

72 Me. 106

ALBERT H. RICKER v. CHARLES E. JOY and dwelling house, S. P. HUNTRESS, claimant.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.

March 3, 1881

ON EXCEPTIONS.

Assumpsit to enforce a lien for materials.

The case is stated in the opinion.

The following is the statement of the lien claim filed in the town clerk's office:

" State of Maine.

York ss. I, Albert H. Ricker, on oath depose and say that there is due me from Charles E. Joy the sum of one hundred and nineteen dollars and forty cents ($119 40/100) for labor and materials furnished for and which entered into the dwelling house of Simeon P. Huntress, situated on land owned by Simeon P. Huntress on the easterly side of Portland street near the ‘ Corner,’ so called, in South Berwick village and owned by said Huntress; that I claim a lien upon said land and dwelling house to the extent of the debt aforesaid."

ALBERT H. RICKER."

" Subscribed and sworn to this third day of January, 1879 before me,

G. C. Yeaton, Justice of the Peace."

G. C. Yeaton, for the plaintiff, cited: 1 Greenl. Ev. 91, 484; Oakes v. Hill, 14 Pick. 442; Commonwealth v. Chase, 6 Cush. 248; R. S., c. 91, § 29; Fairbanks v. Davis, 50 Vt. 251; Wilson v. Hopkins, 51 Ind. 231; Tarr v. Smith, 68 Me. 97; Stewart v. Belfast Foundry Co. 69 Me. 17; Hatheway v. Reed, 127 Mass. 136; Reed v. Acton, 120 Mass. 130; Ewell's Evans, Agency, 379, 402; Colburn v. Phillips, 13 Gray 64; Burr v. Wilcox, 13 Allen 269; Boody v. Goddard, 57 Me. 602; Carleton v. Lewis, 67 Me. 76.

Ira T. Drew and Wells and Burleigh for the claimant, contended that Ricker was a clerk or agent and could not sue in his own name. Story on Agency, § 406; Garland v. Reynolds, 20 Me. 45.

The copy of the clerk's record was inadmissible. It was not the best evidence. A lien claim should be proved the same as a mortgage, by the original paper. State v. Gray, 39 Me. 353.

The statement of the lien claim filed in the clerk's office is defective. The records should show the whole truth relating to the claim--its items, nature, amount, date, from whom due and to whom due.

LIBBEY, J.

The claimant's first exception is to the admission of a duly certified copy of the record of the town, of the plaintiff's claim filed in the town clerk's office as required by R. S., c. 91, § 29.

The object of the statute requirement, that the person claiming the lien shall file a statement of his claim in the office of the clerk of the town where the building is situated, and that it shall be recorded, is to give notice to the owner of the property, and to all persons having occasion to acquire any interest in it, of the lien claimed.

When the statement required by the statute is recorded, the record becomes the notice, and we think such record, or a duly certified copy of it is competent evidence of the filing and recording of the claim. It is similar, in principle, to the record of a notice of foreclosure of a mortgage, or to the record of an attachment of real estate.

The second exception is to the sufficiency of the statement of claim filed by the plaintiff. We think it a sufficient compliance with the provisions of the statute. It states the amount due the plaintiff for which he claims the lien; that it is due for labor and materials furnished for and which entered into the building; a sufficient description of the property; the name of the owner; and it was signed and sworn to by the plaintiff, and filed and recorded.

It is claimed by the counsel for the...