Court Opinion

ID: 9740787
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 20:41:46.3159+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:20.286160
License: Public Domain

SHARPNACK, Judge,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. In the majority's opinion on rehearing, it addresses TriCounty's claim that its mechanic's lien is superior to Bank One's mortgage because Bank One did not appeal the trial court's grant of summary judgment, and the majority concludes that Bank One's mortgage is superior to Tri-County's mechanic's lien for reasons established in its original opinion. I disagree. For reasons consistent with my dissenting opinion, I conclude that Tri-County's mechanic's lien is superior to Bank One's mortgage up to the amount of Tri-County's mechanic's lien.
The majority also notes that Tri-County may sell the driveway and use the pro*804ceeds from the sale to satisfy the lien, and adds that if the mechanic's lien holder elects not to sell the improvement, it may foreclose on its mechanic's lien only after all superior mortgages are satisfied. I disagree. As I noted in my dissenting opinion, when it is impractical and harmful to remove the improvement, the law does not require a mechanic's lien holder to forfeit its priority as to the improvement created by its efforts.
Accordingly, I would grant Tri-County's petition for rehearing.