The comet. (Johnson City, Tenn.) 1884-1916, 1891-09-24
A Supreme Court Opinion
of Interest to WOrkingmen
The Written Opinion Of Judge Cald,
we'll Covers Unsettled Points.
1t Should BE Read by Every Me-
chanic and Contractor in the State.

The following written opinion by
Judge w. G. Caldwell is regarded by
attorneys as one of special interest on
mechanics liens, and should be read
by every mechanic and contractor in
the State.
Hundreds OF cases are now pending
in lower courts throughout the State
that will be affected by this opinion.
w. r. Reeves We. A. P, Henderson &
Co.
This is a suit by sub-contractors and
material men under chapter 1903,
statutes OF 1889.
In September, $780, Carroll & Co.,
contractors and builders, undertook by
special contract with w. r. Reeves,
the plaintiff in error to construct
house on lot owned by him and an
other, in Johnson City, Tennessee.
Henderson & Co., the defendants in
error, by contract with Carroll & Co.,
and without contract with Reeves,
furnished the material and did the
work on the house, completing their
work ON the 10th of November, 1890.
Henderson & Co., on the 21st of the
same month, gave Reeves written no.
tice Of their intention to claim lien
on the house and lot for the work done
and the material furnished
Reeves owed Carroll & Co., nothing
when this notice was given, having al
ready paid them for all materials
furnished and labor performed up to
that time, nor did he owe them any
thing when this suit was brought
On the 9TH Of January, 1891, Hen
derson & Co., instituted this action be-
fore a justice of the peace, against
both Carroll & Co., and Reeves, to en-
force the collection OF their account for
materials furnished and labor done by
them as aforesaid. The justice OF the
peace rendered judgment in favor d
Henderson & Co., for $1457S the
amount OF their demand and adjudged
the same to be lien on the house and
lot.
On appeal to circuit court, the case
was then tried by the circuit judge
without the Intervention of a jury, and
Judgment was again pronounced in
favor of Henderson & Co.
Pending the appeal in the circuit
court, Henderson & Co., on the 22nd
day of January, 1891, filed statement
Of their demand with the register Of
the county and caused the same to be
recorded in the trust book
Reeves prosecutes an appeal on the
nature of writ of error to this court
Three grounds for reversal have beer
urged in argument Of the counsel fol
appellant. LIST, 1t is contended tha
the warrant, as originally issued by the
justice of the peace, was for debt only
and that the circuit Judge enormously
permitted an amendment in his cour
so as to include the matter OF lien Oh
the house and lot.
Though there is some confusion il
the record on the point, it satisfactoril,
appears that the original warrant EN-
braced, as subject matter Of the litiga
ton, both the debt and the lien, ant
that the amendment was made alon
for the purpose of more particular,
describing the property, and not will
view of introducing a new case 0
action.
Such an amendment was clearly al
lowable under section 1852 of the code
(M. &V)
Second. 1t is urged that registration
OF the account was necessary to th
perfection of the lien claimed, an
that this suit can not be maintaine
because commenced before the accoun
was registered.
This position is not tenable. Regi!
tration is not requisite to the creatio
and maturity of the lien as betwee.
the owner of the property and the sui
contractor, Or material man. AS t
them, due notice to the owner is a
that is necessary to fasten the lie
upon the property 1t is only when
particular lienor seeks to give his lie
precedence over the lien OF other pei
sons that registration is required.
The correction OF these proposition
is manifest from the language of th
first section of the act. This sectio
provides for simple lien, and also fC
a lien that shall have precedence owe
other liens. Each OF them depend
upon promise the former upon du
notice merely, and the other upon re-
istration after such notice.
The provision is ~. That lever
iourneyman *, shall have this lie