Falcon Steel, Inc. v. J. Russell Flowers, Inc.
635 F.3d 369
| 8th Cir. | 2011Background
- Falcon Steel supplied steel to UST for Flowers barges and sought a materialman's lien for $376,659.82.
- The construction occurred at UST's Fort Smith, Arkansas yard; the contract involved Flowers and multiple barges (F1–F6).
- UST also built barges for Canal; evidence showed Falcon steel may have been used beyond Flowers’ barges; trial credibility issues arose.
- An August 28, 2008 payment of $65,000 was alleged by some to be an advance/prepayment; the district court found it was applied to oldest invoices per industry practice.
- A December 30, 2008 Partial Release and Assignment released Falcon's lien liability for Barge F2; remaining liens applied to F3–F6.
- The district court held Falcon’s lien timely under Ark. Code. § 18-44-117(a)(1) and that the lien attached to F3–F6.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of lien perfection | Falcon contends last material delivered Sept. 5, 2008; filing on Dec. 10, 2008 timely under 120-day rule. | UST argues last delivery was May 7, 2008; the 120-day period runs from that date. | Lien timely; Sept. 5, 2008 shipment on open account. |
| Extent of lien on Barges F3–F6 | Lien should cover $376,659.82 based on materials shipped for the barges. | Only $65,803.52 in Falcon steel is actually in F3–F6; a full lien would overreach. | Lien extends to F3–F6; majority rejects apportionment; Falcon bears burden to prove actual use. |
Key Cases Cited
- Kizer Lumber Co. v. Mosely, 56 Ark. 544, 20 S.W. 409 (Ark. 1892) (open account tolling and timing considerations in lien context)
- Central Lumber Co. v. Braddock Land & Granite Co., 84 Ark. 560, 105 S.W. 583 (Ark. 1907) (presumption of actual use when materials delivered near site; burden on builder)
- Sebastian Bldg. & Loan Ass'n v. Minten, 181 Ark. 700, 27 S.W.2d 1011 (Ark. 1930) (support for burden shifting when actual use is not proven)
- Van Houten Lumber Co. v. Planters' Nat'l Bank, 159 Ark. 535, 252 S.W. 614 (Ark. 1923) (materials furnished at site; when used in construction matters)
- Burel v. E. Ark. Lumber Co., 129 Ark. 58, 195 S.W. 379 (Ark. 1917) (single-contract/open-account distinctions in multi-project liens)