The Pennsylvania Superior Court recently issued an opinion concerning necessary parties to a mechanics’ lien claim in Schell v. Murphy , 2016 PA Super 302 (December 23, 2016).  A Mechanics’ Lien is a statutory remedy developed by the legislature that grants protections to contractors that were not available to them under the common law.  This holding is significant because it reiterates that a law developed by the legislature, which grants rights that did not exist in common law, must be strictly construed.

In this case, Schell was a contractor who entered into a contract with both Mr. and Mrs. Murphy for landscaping work on property owned solely by Mr. Murphy.  After substantially completing the project, the Murphys fired Schell and refused to pay him for the work and materials he had provided.  Schell filed a mechanics’ lien against Mr. Murphy, as owner of the property.  The trial court found that because the wife was a party to the contract, although not an owner of the property, she was an indispensable party to the mechanic’s lien claim.  The Superior Court reversed explaining that the Mechanics’ Lien Law is intended to protect contractors who, with the expectation of being reimbursed, provide labor and materials to improve another’s property.   The court stressed that mechanics’ lien claims are independent of contracts claims, and are not meant to settle contractual disputes.  The court also reiterated that the statutory requirements must be precisely adhered to by the contractor seeking a lien and strictly construed by the courts.  The Mechanics’ Lien statute requires that the contractor filing a mechanics’ lien must name the owner of the property.  It does not mention parties to a contract, therefore the wife in this case was not an indispensable party.  Although she was a party to the contract, she was not an owner.

The holding in this case kept the mechanics’ lien claim alive because the claim complied precisely with the requirements of the Mechanics’ Lien Law.  However, there are many pitfalls that may be encountered when not following the strict procedure or understanding the purpose and definitions under the Mechanics’ Lien Law.  If a contractor, subcontractor or materials supplier is contemplating filing a mechanics’ lien claim, or if an owner is subject to the filing or threatened filing of a mechanics’ lien, it is critical that they have legal counsel familiar with the law.

The post Mechanics’ Lien Law Update appeared first on The Fleischmann Law Firm, P.C..