883 N.W.2d 475
N.D.2016Background
- In Dec. 2011 Snider (RJ Snider Construction) contracted to perform work on property owned by Dickinson Elks; Snider recorded a construction lien in Jan. 2013 for $198,255.08 after nonpayment.
- In May 2014 Dickinson Elks served a demand requiring Snider to start suit to enforce the lien and record a lis pendens within 30 days.
- Snider sued in June 2014 seeking foreclosure of the lien and a $198,255.08 money judgment; Snider recorded a lis pendens on July 28, 2014 (after 30 days).
- Dickinson Elks moved for summary judgment arguing (1) Snider was an unlicensed contractor when work began and (2) Snider failed to record lis pendens within 30 days of the demand, invalidating the lien.
- The district court forfeited Snider’s construction lien for failing to record the lis pendens within 30 days and later awarded Dickinson Elks $2,994 in attorney’s fees for contesting the lien.
- Snider’s separate contract claim for a $198,255.08 money judgment remained unresolved; the district court did not enter Rule 54(b) certification.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the forfeiture of the construction lien and fee award are appealable now | Snider argued the lien claim and the related issues were resolved and any remaining matters did not prevent appeal | Dickinson Elks argued the lien was forfeited and it was entitled to fees; implicitly sought immediate review | The appeal was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because Snider’s separate money-damages claim remained unresolved and no Rule 54(b) certification was entered |
| Whether the lien was forfeited for failing to record lis pendens within 30 days of demand | Snider argued procedural compliance or entitlement to relief despite timing | Dickinson Elks argued statutory requirement under N.D.C.C. § 35-27-25 was not met, forfeiting the lien | District court forfeited the lien (not directly reviewed due to dismissal of appeal) |
| Whether attorney’s fees awarded for contesting the lien are immediately appealable | Snider contended fee award related to lien issue; timing tied to finality | Dickinson Elks sought fees as prevailing party on lien contest | Fee award is not appealable separately because related money-judgment claim remained pending |
| Whether Rule 54(b) certification applies to permit an immediate appeal | Snider maintained no certification existed | Dickinson Elks did not obtain a Rule 54(b) certification | No Rule 54(b) certification was entered; court found this case not appropriate for such certification; appeal dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Jordet v. Jordet, 861 N.W.2d 154 (N.D. 2015) (appealability and final-judgment requirements govern jurisdiction)
- In re Estate of Hollingsworth, 809 N.W.2d 328 (N.D. 2012) (Rule 54(b) certification and limits on piecemeal appeals)
- Bulman v. Hulstrand Constr. Co., Inc., 503 N.W.2d 240 (N.D. 1993) (policy against piecemeal appeals and Rule 54(b) context)