Case ID: ohio-law-abs_10/html/0350-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "ROSS, PJ.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

BUTLER COUNTY LUMBER CO v STIEG
    Ohio Appeals, 1st Dist, Butler Co
    No. 495.
    Decided May 4, 1931
    Williams, Sohngen, Pitton & Pierce, Hamilton, for Butler Lumber Co.
    H. S. Wonnell, Hamilton, for Stieg.
   ROSS, PJ.

Without reviewing the evidence at length, it is plain that the owner had taken possession of the premises long before the purchase of the door stops, and that these-in no way constituted a furnishing of material under the contract.

There is evidence that the husband of the owner offered to pay cash for the “stops,” but was told by the lienholder’s employes that they would charge it to the contractor. This evidence is denied it is true, but all the circumstances surrounding the incident indicate that the lien holder seized upon the small, insignificant purchase of these stops to extend the time for filing its lien which had long since passed.

The lien, not having been filed within sixty days from the last item of the account of material furnished under the contract, the lien holder must fail in maintaining its lien against the property of the owner.

A decree similar to that entered in the Court of Common Pleas may be presented here.

HAMILTON and CUSHING, JJ, concur.