Upon discovering that Thomas had stored property belonging to the estate in Webster's storage facility, Caroline, as executor, filed an action in replevin against Webster. After a bench trial, the court found Webster to have a lien on all property contained in the storage facility for past rent, attorney fees and court costs. The court ordered Webster, upon payment of the lien, to return any items belonging to the estate. Accordingly, Webster cannot have any interest in the estate property because Thomas had no ownership rights over the property when he placed it in storage. Webster responds that a lien on the property is appropriate under section 3 of the Act.
Liens originate from a variety of sources, including the common law, statute and equity.
The common law right to impose a lien or seize property for the compulsion of rental payments dates back to feudal times. At common law, innkeepers could maintain a lien over property which guests brought to the inn. There were two opposing theories, however, regarding whether an innkeeper could secure a lien on stolen property. Ohio's common law, for example, would not allow an innkeeper's lien under such circumstances. For the innkeeper is bound to receive and entertain the guest, and when unaccompanied by any suspicious circumstances, would not be justified in inquiring into the title to the property delivered by the guest to his possession.