Case Name: Samuel Lee vs. T. F. Kendall; Philip Bouron vs. T. F. Kendall, Peter Markey et al., Intervenors and Third Opponents
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1880
Citations: 1 Mann. Unrep. Cas. 19
Docket Number: No. 6470
Parties: Samuel Lee vs. T. F. Kendall. Philip Bouron vs. T. F. Kendall, Peter Markey et al., Intervenors and Third Opponents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Unreported cases heard and determined by the Supreme Court of Louisiana, from January 8, 1877, to April, 1880
Volume: 1
Pages: 19–21

Head Matter:
No. 6470.
Samuel Lee vs. T. F. Kendall. Philip Bouron vs. T. F. Kendall, Peter Markey et al., Intervenors and Third Opponents.
Improvements put upon land by the owner of it become by accession a part of the soil, so that a mortgage upon unimproved land attaches to the buildings afterwards erected on it.
No privilege can exist as against third persons unless recorded, and all persons who are not parties to a contract or a judgment are third persons as to it.
The privilege for materials furnished for a building can be preserved only by recording it. If therefore one elects to deliver materials from day to day, without written or verbal contract, and fails to record his affidavit as to the quantity, price, etc., he will have no privilege as against a mortgage or privilege creditor who has recorded his lien.
Appeal from the Fifth District Court of New Orleans. Cullom, J.
II. D. & G. G. Ogden for Plaintiffs. Hornor & Benedict, BcCker, Tucker, and Rice for Intervenors Appellants.
The plaintiffs in the two suits held a mortgage upon the defendant’s lot, which was unimproved when the mortgage was given and recorded, May 19, 1871. Buildings were erected on it shortly after-wards, and Markey had furnished the lumber used in their construction. The other intervenors had furnished other materials. Markey’s privilege was recorded August 12, 1871, for a sum stated in liis affidavit as being due July 18, 1871.
None of the other intervenors had recorded their claims until later. The plaintiffs foreclosed their mortgage by executory process, and the sum realized from the sale was not more than sufficient to pay their mortgage.

Opinion:
Egan, J.
By Art. 3274 C. C. such privilege (that for materials furnished) confers no preference over creditors who have acquired a mortgage, unless the act or the evidence of debt is recorded on the day that the contract is entered into. If that is not done it takes effect only from the date of registry. In this case that was subsequent to the registry of the plaintiff's mortgage to which therefore the privilege, not having been recorded the day it was acquired, must yield.
Decreed accordingly.