Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1907-09-18
FROM LAW COURT.
Reseript in Penobscot County Case of
York Versus Mathis.

The law court has handed down n
rescript in the Penobscot County case
of Samuel n. York. ct ais in equity
versus l.. D. Mathis, ct ais. dismissinr
the appeal of the defendant and
the decree below with nd
ditional costs.
The rescript, drawn by Justice
WhltchouSe is as follows:
The statute gives lien to persons
performing labor or furni ;hinc
materials in erecting or repairing any
building by virtue of a contract with
or by consent of the owner" and
provides that If the labor or mate
rails We're not furnished by contract
with the owner" he may prevent such
lien by giving written notice that he,
will not be :..sn"nsihlc therefor.
a building known as the auditorium
owned by the Eastern Maine Musical
Association was occupied bv the
defendant Mathis under a written
lease providing that the premises were
TO be used as a skating rink" ana
the plaintiffs by virtue of a contract
with the tenant Mathis furnished
materials and performed labor i'm re-
laying il portion II the floor when WA,
found to be in an unsuitable condition
for skating.
In Il proceeding in equity to enforce
their lien on the building, in which the
plaintiffs contendci that the work was
done by them by consent of the
corporation known as the Musical
Association, the owner Of the bllil,!in.
it appeared that the new section Of
floor WAS laid with the intention If
making it a permanent Improvement
to the building as Well as a convent
ence to the tenant; that it would haze
been of no value for removal hv
Mathis during his tenancy, and was
not in fact removed by him, ana that
the building with the floor thus re-
paired, continued to be used as Il
skating rink after he surrendered
possession. 1t also appeared that Mr.
Bcal, the president of the Association,
was present in the building the next
day after the plaintiffs commenced the
repairs, ana had knowledge. Of the
before the old boards had
all been taken up and before any pHrt
of the new floor had been laid or the
therefor had been Furnished,
that he made comments upon the
work, but expressed no dissent or
dissa abstraction, and gave no notice 10
the plaintiffs that the association
would not be responsible for the re-
pairs. 1t further appears that in Il
suit brought in the name of the as
ISOLATION against Mathis to recover
arrears in rent. Mr.. Rcal gave credit
for $50, as AN allowance on floor"
Held.
l. Th9t the decree entered by n
single justice, in accordance with the
advisory verdict Of the jury, sustain
ing the plaintiffs lien, was not shown
by the appellants to be clearly
erroneous, and must be affirmed.
>. That while the consent required
by the statute to constitute the
foundation Of q lien must be some
thing more than 4 mere acquiescrn, q
in the act Of 4 tenant who for his own
convenience makes temporary cree
tons and additions which he has Il
right to remove durin: his tenancy.
yet if the owner of the buildia% n Is
knowledge that certain repairs aic
necessary and makes no provision trr
them. but is present when they are be
ing made by his tenant and gives no
notice that he will not be responsible
therefor, his consent may be inferred
from hi; conduct considered in con-
n"ction with all the circumstances Of
the case
2. That it is competent for board
of directors to establish mutual
that one of their num-
her shall be- the active agent of the
board in the management of the
ness affairs of the corporation: and
that it is not Indispensable that such
an understanding should he created by
Il formal vote or proved by Il formal
record. but that it may be Inferred
frnin The situation and conduct of the
parties
4. That il was not error on the part
Of II" ju:% and the presiding judge Ia
draw the Inference that Mr.. Beal had
Hc.EiI"d ia" authority to bind the
by tn" habit If actin" with
tn" rs nj and acqUirGcrncr Of the
beard nf directors. ana to finI that the
rtI-. ir.. WE'RE. made "by consent Of The
owner" given through Mi. !.ral. IL
agent, within The meaning
of the statute.
Appeal dismissed
Decree below affirmed with al
litipnal costs.