No. 80-283
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
GENERAL ELECTRIC SUPPLY COMPANY,
DIVISION OF GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY,
A CORPORATION,
Plaintiff and Appellant,
GARY V. BENNETT and HAROLD E. GERKE, et al. ,
Defendants and Respondents.
Appeal from: District Court of the Thirteenth Judicial District,
In and for the County of Yellowstone, Montana
Honorable Diane Barz, Judge presiding.
Counsel of Record:
For Appellant:
Fred N. Dugan, Billings, Montana
For Respondents:
Stacey & Jarussi, Billings, Montana
Submitted on briefs: January 8, 1981
Decided: April 15, 1981
Filed: BQR 1.5 1981
I I I
Y P Clerk
Mr. J u s t i c e Fred J. Weber d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e C o u r t .
P l a i n t i f f G e n e r a l E l e c t r i c Supply Company (General
E l e c t r i c ) a p p e a l s from t h e o r d e r and judgment e n t e r e d by t h e
D i s t r i c t C o u r t of t h e T h i r t e e n t h J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , Yellowstone
County, g r a n t i n g summary judgment t o t h e d e f e n d a n t s (owners)
a f t e r c r o s s - m o t i o n s f o r summary judgment had been made. The
o r d e r and judgment i n v a l i d a t e General E l e c t r i c ' s m e c h a n i c ' s
l i e n on c e r t a i n p r o p e r t y of t h e d e f e n d a n t s . The s o l e i s s u e
i n v o l v e d i n t h i s a p p e a l i s one of law: Is t h e d e s c r i p t i o n
of t h e s u b j e c t p r o p e r t y , which d e s c r i p t i o n i s c o n t a i n e d i n
t h e n o t i c e of l i e n f i l e d w i t h t h e c o u n t y c l e r k and r e c o r d e r ,
l e g a l l y s u f f i c i e n t t o i d e n t i f y t h e p r o p e r t y f o r p u r p o s e of
enforcing the l i e n ? W h o l d t h a t t h e o r d e r and judgment of
e
t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t s h o u l d be r e v e r s e d , and summary judgment
s h o u l d be e n t e r e d i n f a v o r of a p p e l l a n t G e n e r a l E l e c t r i c .
The a p p e a l h a s been s u b m i t t e d on a n a g r e e d s t a t e m e n t
of f a c t s . The q u o t e s which a p p e a r i n t h e f o l l o w i n g d e s c r i p t i o n
of f a c t s a r e t a k e n from t h a t a g r e e d s t a t e m e n t .
The owners c a u s e d a b u i l d i n g t o be c o n s t r u c t e d on t h e i r
following-described property: The South 90 f e e t of L o t -,
9
Block 1, of V a l l e y V i e w Acres S u b d i v i s i o n , i n t h e C i t y of
B i l l - i n g s , Yellowstone County, Montana.
General E l e c t r i c s o l d e l e c t r i c a l s u p p l i e s t o t h e e l e c t r i c a l
s u b c o n t r a c t o r on t h e job. On F e b r u a r y 23, 1978, and w i t h i n
90 d a y s a f t e r t h e l a s t of t h e e l e c t r i c a l m a t e r i a l s was
s u p p l i e d , G e n e r a l E l e c t r i c f i l e d a n o t i c e of i t s m e c h a n i c ' s
l i e n w i t h t h e c o u n t y c l e r k and r e c o r d e r .
"The n o t i c e s t a t e s t h a t t h e r e p u t e d owners of t h e
l a n d s and p r e m i s e s and t h e o f f i c e b u i l d i n g l o -
c a t e d t h e r e o n w e r e Gary V . B e n n e t t and Harold E.
Gerke, d/b/a B e n n e t t & Gerke, t h a t t h e r e a s o n a b l e
v a l u e of t h e b u i l d i n g m a t e r i a l s f u r n i s h e d by c l a i m -
a n t was i n t h e sum of $14,173.37, and t h a t t h e
p r o p e r t y t o be c h a r g e d w i t h t h e l i e n i s t h e ' o f f i c e
b u i l d i n g ' l o c a t e d on L o t s 7 and 8 i n Block 1 of
V a l l e y View Acres S u b d i v i s i o n and t h e l a n d s ' h e r e -
i n b e f o r e d e s c r i b e d on which s a i d b u i l d i n g i s s i t u -
ated'. The i n v o i c e s a t t a c h e d a s e x h i b i t s t o t h e
n o t i c e each r e f e r r e d v a r i o u s l y t o t h e a p p l i c a b l e
charges a s f o r : 'Bennett Office Building'; 'Bennett
O f f i c e ' ; 'Bennett'; o r 'Bennetts'. A s emphasized
above, t h e b u i l d i n g was a c t u a l l y l o c a t e d on L o t 9
n o t L o t s 7 and 8." Agreed S t a t e m e n t i n L i e u of
Record on Appeal, p. 2 .
T h e r e a f t e r a p o r t i o n of t h e s u p p l i e s was r e t u r n e d t o
G e n e r a l E l e c t r i c unused. The remaining s u p p l i e s , i n t h e
amount of $10,586.18, were a c t u a l l y used i n t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n
of t h e b u i l d i n g . The owners s u b s t i t u t e d t h e i r bond i n t h e
r e m a i n i n g amount s o a s t o d i s c h a r g e t h e l i e n on t h e p r o p e r t y .
" S u i t on t h e bond i n t h e manner of f o r e c l o s u r e of
Mechanic's L i e n b u t r e c i t i n g t h e s u b s t i t u t i o n of
t h e bond was commenced on F e b r u a r y 7, 1979 naming
a s d e f e n d a n t s t h e owners, t h e prime c o n t r a c t o r ,
t h e s u b c o n t r a c t o r and t h e bonding company . . .
A f t e r t h e f i l i n g i n bankruptcy by t h e s u b c o n t r a c t o r ,
h i s t r u s t e e i n b a n k r u p t c y was s u b s t i t u t e d i n h i s
p l a c e and d e f a u l t w a s e n t e r e d a g a i n s t t h e t r u s t e e .
The d e f e n d a n t owners answered c o u n t e r c l a i m i n g f o r
t h e c o s t of t h e i r bond premium and c r o s s - c o m p l a i n i n g
a g a i n s t t h e prime c o n t r a c t o r , Mora, f o r any judgment
p l a i n t i f f might s u s t a i n .. . [ T l h e i s s u e s con-
c e r n i n g Mora, t h e prime c o n t r a c t o r were s e v e r e d
f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n a f t e r t r i a l o r d e t e r m i n a t i o n of
t h e i s s u e s between p l a i n t i f f and t h e d e f e n d a n t
owners and bonding company on t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e mo-
t i o n s f o r summary judgment." Agreed S t a t e m e n t i n
L i e u of Record on Appeal, p. 3 .
The owners and bonding company moved f o r summary judg-
ment, and f i l e d a b r i e f i n s u p p o r t of t h e motion. General
E l e c t r i c a l s o moved f o r summary judgment, and f i l e d a b r i e f
and s u p p o r t i n g a f f i d a v i t s . The owners d i d n o t f i l e any
a f f i d a v i t s i n s u p p o r t of t h e i r own motion, and d i d n o t f i l e
a f f i d a v i t s o r a b r i e f i n opposition t o General E l e c t r i c ' s
motion.
"The m a t t e r was t h e n s u b m i t t e d t o t h e C o u r t upon
c r o s s motions f o r summary judgment. Thereafter
t h e C o u r t e n t e r e d i t s Order g r a n t i n g t h e d e f e n d a n t s '
motion f o r summary judgment and denying p l a i n t i f f ' s
motion. A pre-judgment h e a r i n g was h e l d i n which due
proof was made of d e f e n d a n t s damages by way of bond
premium c o s t and of t h e r e a s o n a b l e v a l u e of t h e i r
a t t o r n e y ' s f e e s , whereupon summary judgment f o r t h e
d e f e n d a n t s was e n t e r e d from which t h i s a p p e a l i s
taken." Agreed S t a t e m e n t i n L i e u of Record on Appeal,
pages 4-5.
T h i s a p p e a l i s t a k e n upon c r o s s - m o t i o n s f o r summary
judgment. W a g r e e t h a t t h e r e i s no g e n u i n e i s s u e a s t o any
e
m a t e r i a l f a c t , b u t w e hold t h a t t h e D i s t r i c t Court e r r e d i n
g r a n t i n g summary judgment t o t h e owners. General E l e c t r i c
i s e n t i t l e d t o a judgment a s a m a t t e r of law, and n o t t h e
owners. Rule 5 6 ( c ) , M.R.Civ.P.
S e c t i o n 71-3-511(1), MCA, prescribes the necessary
s t e p s t o be followed i n a c q u i r i n g a mechanic's l i e n :
"How t o p e r f e c t l i e n . (1) Every p e r s o n w i s h i n g t o
a v a i l h i m s e l f of t h e b e n e f i t s of t h i s p a r t must f i l e ,
w i t h t h e c o u n t y c l e r k of t h e c o u n t y i n which t h e
p r o p e r t y o r p r e m i s e s mentioned i n 71-3-501 i s s i t u -
a t e d and w i t h i n 90 d a y s a f t e r t h e m a t e r i a l o r machin-
e r y a f o r e s a i d h a s been f u r n i s h e d o r t h e work o r l a b o r
performed, a j u s t and t r u e a c c o u n t of t h e amount due
him, a f t e r a l l o w i n g a l l c r e d i t s , c o n t a i n i n g a c o r r e c t
--
d e s c r i p t i o n - - p r o p e r t y- -t -o be c h a r g e d wigh such
of t h e
l i e n , v e r i f i e d by a f f i d a v i t , - - e r r o r o r m i s t a k e
b u t any
- -e a c c o u n t
i n th or d e s c r i p t i o n --t a f f e c t t h e
does n o
v a l i d i t y - -e l i - - t h e p r o p e r t y - - i d e n t i f i e d
of t h - e n i f c a n be
by -e d e s c r i p t i o n .
- th The p a p e r c o n t a i n i n g t h e a c c o u n t ,
d e s c r i p t i o n , and a f f i d a v i t i s deemed t h e l i e n . When
t h e r e i s a n open a c c o u n t between t h e p a r t i e s f o r l a b o r ,
m a t e r i a l , o r machinery, such l i e n may be f i l e d w i t h i n
90 d a y s a f t e r t h e d a t e of t h e l a s t i t e m i n s u c h ac-
c o u n t and i n c l u d e a l l i t e m s and c h a r g e s c o n t a i n e d
t h e r e i n f o r m a t e r i a l o r machinery f u r n i s h e d f o r , o r
work performed o n , t h e p r o p e r t y on which t h e l i e n i s
claimed." (Emphasis added.)
The above s t a t u t e and i t s emphasized p o r t i o n have been
c o n s t r u e d by t h i s C o u r t many t i m e s . This Court has uniformly
h e l d t h a t t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s of t h e m e c h a n i c ' s l i e n s t a t u t e s
a s t o p r o c e d u r e w i l l be s t r i c t l y e n f o r c e d . Once t h e p r o c e d u r e
h a s been f u l f i l l e d , t h e s t a t u t e s w i l l be l i b e r a l l y c o n s t r u e d
so a s t o give e f f e c t t o t h e i r remedial character. Federal
Land Bank of Spokane v . Green ( 1 9 3 9 ) , 108 Mont. 56, 62-63,
90 P.2d 489, 491-492; Western I r o n Works v. Montana P u l p &
Paper Co. ( 1 9 0 4 ) , 30 Mont. 550, 558, 77 P . 413, 416.
The p r o p e r t y t o be d e s c r i b e d and t o which t h e l i e n a t -
t a c h e s i s t h e b u i l d i n g o r improvement i t s e l f . ~arco-~ruden
v . Nelson (1979), -Mont. , 593 P.2d 48, 50, 36 St.Rep.
704, 706. Based upon t h e a b o v e - s t a t e d r u l e of l i b e r a l
c o n s t r u c t i o n , t h i s Court has held t h a t " i f t h e d e s c r i p t i o n
of t h e b u i l d i n g i t s e l f i s s u f f i c i e n t t o e n a b l e a p e r s o n
f a m i l i a r w i t h t h e l o c a l i t y t o p o i n t i t o u t a s t h e o n l y one
corresponding with the d e s c r i p t i o n contained i n t h e l i e n , i t
m e e t s a l l t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s of t h e s t a t u t e .. .I' Varco-
Pruden v. Nelson, s u p r a ; Midland Coal & Lumber Co. v . Ferguson
(19211, 61 Mont. 402, 405, 2 0 2 P. 389, 390.
I n seeking t o determine i f a p a r t y f a m i l i a r with t h e
l o c a l i t y c a n i d e n t i f y t h e p r o p e r t y from t h e d e s c r i p t i o n ,
"whether a g i v e n d e s c r i p t i o n i s s u f f i c i e n t o r n o t depends
upon t h e s u r r o u n d i n g c i r c u m s t a n c e s , t h e c h a r a c t e r of t h e
p a r t i c u l a r building, i t s s i t u a t i o n with reference t o others,
etc." Midland - -
Coal & Lumber -
Co., 61 Mont. 406, 202 P. 390.
Although t h e s t a t u t e s e x t e n d t h e l i e n on t h e s t r u c t u r e
t o t h e l a n d i t s e l f , t h e l a n d need n o t be d e s c r i b e d . Section
71-3-514, MCA; F e d e r a l --- of Spokane, 108 Mont. 64,
Land Bank
90 P.2d 492. O f t e n , a d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e l a n d i s i n c l u d e d
so a s t o further identify the particular structure. Morrison-
M a i e r l e , I n c . v. S e l s c o (19801, -Mont. -, 606 P.2d 1085,
1087, 37 St.Rep. 299, 301; Midland - -
Coal & Lumber -
Co., 61 Mont.
405, 2 0 2 P. 390; Western I r o n Works, 30 Mont. 556, 77 P. 416.
I n c a s e s where t h e l e g a l d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e l a n d con-
t a i n e d e r r o r s , t h i s C o u r t s t a t e d t h a t " i f , by r e j e c t i n g what
i s erroneous i n t h e d e s c r i p t i o n contained i n the l i e n ,
enough remains t o i d e n t i f y t h e p a r t i c u l a r p r o p e r t y s o u g h t t o
be c h a r g e d , t h e l i e n w i l l be u p h e l d . " Caird ~ n g i n e e r i n g
Works v . Seven U Gold Mining Co.,
p Inc. ( 1 9 4 1 ) , 1 1 Mont.
1
471, 479, 1 1 P.2d 267, 2 7 2 ; Midland Coal & Lumber Co. v .
1
Ferguson, s u p r a .
Under t h e s t a t u t e s , t h e a c c o u n t s and s t a t e m e n t s f i l e d
w i t h t h e n o t i c e of l i e n form p a r t o f t h e l i e n i t s e l f , and
can be used f o r f u r t h e r a i d i n i d e n t i f y i n g t h e b u i l d i n g s o u g h t
t o be c h a r g e d . S e c t i o n 71-3-511(1), MCA; Morrison-Maierle,
I n c . v. S e l s c o , s u p r a ; F e d e r a l - -Bank of Spokane, 108 Mont.
Land -
63-64, 90 P.2d 4 9 2 .
The p u r p o s e of r e q u i r i n g n o t i c e of t h e l i e n t o be f i l e d
i s t o p r o t e c t a l l p a r t i e s dealing with t h e property, including
i n n o c e n t t h i r d p a r t i e s and s u b s e q u e n t p u r c h a s e r s . Morrison-
M a i e r l e , I n c . v. S e l s c o , s u p r a ; Western -- 30 Mont.
I r o n Works,
557, 77 P. 4 1 6 . T h i s C o u r t w i l l c o n s t r u e t h e adequacy of
t h e d e s c r i p t i o n more s t r i c t l y a g a i n s t t h e l i e n c l a i m a n t
where t h i r d p a r t i e s a r e i n v o l v e d t h a n where o n l y t h e owners
themselves a r e involved:
"The same r u l e of c o n s t r u c t i o n would c e r t a i n l y n o t
a p p l y i n a c a s e where t h e r e s u l t a f f e c t e d t h e i n -
t e r e s t of a n i n n o c e n t p u r c h a s e r f o r v a l u e , whose
r i g h t s m i g h t have been p r e j u d i c e d by a l a c k of f u l l
d e s c r i p t i o n , and one which a f f e c t e d o n l y t h e i n t e r e s t
of t h e owner whose l a n d h a s been enhanced i n v a l u e
by t h e l i e n c l a i m a n t s , and who i s presumed t o know
its location." C a i r d E n g i n e e r i n g Works v . Seven Up
Gold Mining Co., s u p r a , 1 1 Mont. 481, 1 1 P.2d 273.
1 1
See a l s o B l o s e v. Havre O i l & Gas Co. ( 1 9 3 4 ) , 96
Mont. 450, 466-467, 31 P.2d 738, 744.
Turning now t o t h e f a c t s of t h i s a p p e a l , we n o t e f i r s t
t h a t o n l y t h e l i e n c l a i m a n t and t h e owners o f t h e p r o p e r t y
a r e involved. N t h i r d p a r t y h a s been m i s l e d t o h i s d e t r i -
o
ment by t h e i n c o r r e c t d e s c r i p t i o n . T h e r e f o r e , t h e owners'
argument t h a t t h i r d p a r t i e s might have been m i s l e d i s unper-
s u a s i v e , and t h e owners t h e m s e l v e s c o u l d n o t have been
m i s l e d by t h e i n c o r r e c t d e s c r i p t i o n .
The n o t i c e of l i e n d e s c r i b e s t h e s t r u c t u r e i t s e l f a s a n
" o f f i c e b u i l d i n g " and t h e i n v o i c e s a t t a c h e d a s e x h i b i t s
d e s c r i b e i t a s "Bennett Office Building", "Bennett Office",
" B e n n e t t " , and " B e n n e t t s " . Omitting t h e i n c o r r e c t p o r t i o n
of t h e l e g a l d e s c r i p t i o n , t h e b u i l d i n g i s d e s c r i b e d a s b e i n g
l o c a t e d on Block 1 of V a l l e y View A c r e s S u b d i v i s i o n i n
B i l l i n g s , Yellowstone County, Montana.
The f o l l o w i n g i s a p e r t i n e n t p o r t i o n of General E l e c t r i c ' s
e x h i b i t "C" showing t h e l o c a t i o n of t h e l o t s i n q u e s t i o n :
The a f f i d a v i t s and p h o t o g r a p h s s u b m i t t e d i n e v i d e n c e by
G e n e r a l E l e c t r i c show o n l y two commercial b u i l d i n g s on Block
1, t h e Royal Fork r e s t a u r a n t b u i l d i n g ( o b v i o u s l y n o t a n
o f f i c e b u i l d i n g ) and t h e B e n n e t t o f f i c e b u i l d i n g . This
e v i d e n c e i s n o t c o n t r o v e r t e d o r r e b u t t e d by t h e owners, and
i s t h e r e f o r e taken a s t r u e . Swecker v . Dorn ( 1 9 7 9 ) , -Mont. I
593 P.2d 1 0 5 5 , 1 0 5 8 , 36 St.Rep. 844, 847. The u n c o n t r o v e r t e d
e v i d e n c e forms a p r o p e r b a s i s f o r summary judgment. Rule
56 ( e ), M.R.Civ.P.
Using o n l y t h e c o r r e c t p o r t i o n s of t h e d e s c r i p t i o n con-
t a i n e d i n G e n e r a l E l e c t r i c ' s n o t i c e of l i e n , and u s i n g t h e
a c c o u n t s t a t e m e n t s which form p a r t of t h e l i e n f o r f u r t h e r
a i d i n identification, the building subject t o the l i e n i s
d e s c r i b e d a s t h e " B e n n e t t O f f i c e B u i l d i n g " l o c a t e d on Block
1 of V a l l e y View Acres S u b d i v i s i o n of B i l l i n g s , Yellowstone
County, Montana. Considering the uncontradicted evidence,
it i s c l e a r t h a t a person f a m i l i a r with t h e l o c a l i t y could
i d e n t i f y t h e p r o p e r t y s u b j e c t t o t h e c l a i m of l i e n . The
d e s c r i p t i o n c o n t a i n e d i n t h e n o t i c e of l i e n i s s u f f i c i e n t t o
allow l i e n foreclosure. Any q u e s t i o n i n t h i s r e g a r d i s
e l i m i n a t e d by t h e p r e s e n c e of t h e owners a s t h e o n l y p a r t i e s
i n v o l v e d and t h e a b s e n c e of i n n o c e n t t h i r d p a r t i e s .
W r e v e r s e t h e judgment of t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t , and
e
remand t h e c a s e f o r e n t r y of judgment i n f a v o r of G e n e r a l
E l e c t r i c Supply Company.
W concur:
e
Chief J u s t i c e \