, 1892-05-04
LIEN LAW DECISION.
Non-Residents Who Furnish Mate
rial Have no Lein.

A Protection to tine Material Men
of Washin & gtom---Judge Robin
son,s Decision Relative to the
RcKemny Building, in Olympia.
IN the superior court Of the state Of Wash
ington, for Thurston county.
G. G. Clark, plaintiff, VS.. I. I. McKenny
and wife, defendants:
The material facts as they appear from
the complaint in this cause are as follows:
The plaintiff was engaged in the busi-
ness Of handling wrought iron, pipes,
steam, water and gas fittings, brass goods,
engineers supplies" ETC., at Portland, in
the state of Oregon; that the plaintiff, be-
tween the LIST day of June, 1891, and the
10th day Of August, 1891 sold and delivered
certain materials to the firm of Lansing 81
Baymer, who were then engaged as con-
tractors for these defendants in the con-
struetion of what is known as the Nc
Kenny block, in the city of Olympia (now
occupied by the state officers) which were
to be and were used in the erection of that
building. That the materials consisted of
apump, tanks, valves, pipes, fittings,
steam and water connections and appli-
ances" to be used in the erection and fit
ting up of said building that the plaintiff
ais in said building that the value of said
materials and labor were Of the reasonable
value $119l; that the said Lansing 4 Bay
mar were the 3statutOry agents" of these
defendants under the mechanics lien law
of this state. That upon the defendants
refusing to pay plaintiff, said amount he
caused to be filed on the 18th day of Octo-
ber, 1891, lien for materials and labor
against said building and the lot upon
which it is situated. A copy
of the lien is made a part
Of the complaint. This action
is brought to foreclose that lien
against McKenny and wife alone, who were
and are the owners of the property. The
plaintiff prays judgment against the de-
PENDANTS for said sum with interest; for the
sum of $25 expended in perfecting such
lien, and for $100 attorney fees; that the
property be sold and the lien be satisfied
from the proceeds; and that in the event
the proceeds are insufficient, the plaintiff
have Judgment against the defendants for
the balance remaining unsatisfed.
To this complaint counsel for defendants
files demurrer on the grounds, 1st, that no
lien exists in favor of the plaintiff in this
case; End, that no personal judgment can
be rendered against defendants for the
value of the materials furnished or labor
performed 3rd, that the notice Of lien is
fatally defective.
In the enforcement of a mechanics lien,
good pleading requires that every essential
statutory step in the creation and the fore.
closure thereof, should be shown affirma-
lively, and a complaint which fails in any
one particular, when measured by de-
murrer, does not state cause of action.
1t is the duty Of the pleader to bring him.
self clearly within the statute before he il
entitled TO relief. While our supreme
court has passed upon many questions
,T,atE-
the state, a careful examination Of all lts
decisions, throws but meager light upor
the meaning of or construction to be giVeI
such laws, None of these decisions appear
to come up to that line where one can say
that the law has been construed to NEAR
| this, that or the other, and the superior
courts are still compelled to Wrestle witt
! the "gems of ambiguity found not alone
| in the law itself. Too often the decision o.
court tends rather to befog than to en-
| tighten, and too many courts seem in
| clined to avoid constituting a statute
content to exercise the great learning O.
the Judge in SO wording the opinion, tina
while it effectuaIly determines tht
case before him for consideration, i
really susceptible Of either one Q
very many constructions, thus leav
ing one in doubt as to whether b
has or has not brought himself within 1T
provisions. In passing upon laws grant1n;
special privileges, or the enforcement o
preferred rights, a decision should b
1 pointed and explicit, SO that the decision
4 itself may have, at least, less of the doubt
full within it than the statute it seeks t.
construe. Our mechanics lien law is al
important portion of our statute; it wa
enacted for the wise purpose of protectin
the citizen furnishing the material to b
used in the improvement, and the individ
ual who contributes his labor thereto, bu
today no portion of our state statutes
more engulfed in honest doubtin the mind
Of bench, bar and litigant than is the mt
chanie's lien law. And as a result, owners
| contractors, material men and laborers ar
continually engaged in expensive, fruitles
litigation This law ought to receive sue
a construction from the states highes
court as will enable those by the law er
trusted with such dangerous powers, to e1
ercise them inteligently and without VI
necessary expense or annoyance to th
owner. and at the same time SO clearly de
fine the right of the material men and Ii
borer that these might be perfected and Ell
forced with confidence and certainty
Courts briefly clothed with the duty ofsta
utory construction should not hesitate
say Just what they believe the statute
mean, to the end that this meaning ma
be given force and effect in the field Of bus
ness. Anything short of positiEeness Worl
injury. Better be wrong and clear tina
right and doubtful. The former all fo
low, the latter very few. The first protec
all who follow it, the second depends upc
another decision, explanatory in characte
and then, as rule, leaves you In doubt.
This law was enacted for the benefit
the material man doing business with
this state and not for the resident OF OF
gon. Such statute is local IN operate
and effect. 1t has no extra territorial op
ration. It is limited solely to persons, co
tracts and buildings in this state. III
material man selling and delivering me
4 chandise within the state of Oregon to
J used in Washington, does SO at a pla
where our law is imperative. This plair
iff in selling these materials to Lansing
Baymer may have at the time intended
claim lien in the event that the bill W
not paid, but the right of lien does not c
pend upon intention. If SO it might
changed at pleasure or defeated by ac
dent. The right of lien depends upon t
time and place of its creation. A contre
= for material to be used in Washingtc
made and performed within the state
Oregon, cannot be enforced as a lien wit
in this state Our mechanics lien law,
in its extent and purpose, is the same
our exemption law; the latter protects
individual citizen of the state while with
the state. 1t operates only within
state. The mo oment he shifts, or attem]
to ShlIGi ms uomlclIe from gne SCaUe
a Washington to another state, that momt
he loses its protecting care. To be EMIT
to Its benefits he must be within its jul
dictional territory. Our lien law NAL
the contractor "the agent of the owner
the purpose of the act, but certainly
.e purpose of the act cannot extend beyC
the state line, and the powers Of this s4el
latiYe agency" can certainly be no broa
than the act itself. He may purchase
his own account in state other than tt
in which his contract work is carried
but he cannot do SO as the tstatut
agent" Of the owner so as to create b
fora lien against his or their property.
contractors agency and the measure of
/. authority are created by the statute
- not by the owner, and the jurisdiction
the legislature is fixed by the boundarie
that state of which it is the law max
power If this Legislative agent" can I
chase material on credit in Portland K
en- need in the Gnnstrnntinn of q hIIiIdinn