215 A.3d 1002
Pa. Super. Ct.2019Background
- Terra Firma Builders (Contractor) filed a mechanics' lien on Feb. 20, 2013 for $131,123.24 against William and Melanie King (Owners); the lien was served in March 2013 and later voluntarily withdrawn.
- Contractor refiled the identical mechanics' lien on Apr. 29, 2013 but failed to file the affidavit of service required by 49 P.S. § 1502(a)(2).
- Owners did not file Section 505 preliminary objections to the original or refilled claim, nor did they raise the service defect during the enforcement action or at trial on consolidated claims — the enforcement action was filed Feb. 19, 2015 and proceeded to trial.
- While post-trial motions were pending in 2018, Owners filed a petition/motion to strike the lien under Section 505 based on the defective service; the trial court granted the motion and struck the lien as untimely compliance with § 1502.
- Contractor appealed; the Superior Court analyzed whether a Section 505 challenge based on defective perfection (lack of affidavit of service) may be raised after the enforcement action and trial or was waived by the Owners' failure to timely assert it.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a deficiency in service/perfection (failure to file affidavit of service under § 1502) can be raised after the enforcement action and trial via a Section 505 motion to strike | Contractor: Owners waived the defect by not filing Section 505 objections when the lien was filed, not raising it in the enforcement action, at trial, or in post-trial motions | Owners: Section 505 does not specify a filing deadline, so preliminary objections to a claim may be filed at any time, even after trial | The Superior Court reversed: the Owners waived the service defect by failing to raise it in the enforcement proceeding; Section 505 defenses must be raised "preliminary" or in the enforcement action under applicable civil procedure rules or are waived |
| Whether the Mechanics' Lien Law requires strict compliance with statutory procedures to preserve lien rights | Owners: statutory requirements are mandatory and defects justify striking a claim | Contractor: agrees statute is strict but contends procedural waiver applies when owner fails to timely object | Court: mechanics' lien rights are statutory and require strict compliance, but a Section 505 defense may be waived if not timely asserted in the enforcement proceeding |
Key Cases Cited
- Terra Technical Services, LLC v. River Station Land, L.P., 124 A.3d 289 (Pa. 2015) (mechanics' liens are creatures of statute designed to protect unpaid labor and material providers)
- Bricklayers of Western Pennsylvania Combined Funds, Inc. v. Scott's Development Co., 90 A.3d 682 (Pa. 2014) (same statutory nature of mechanics' liens)
- Schell v. Murphy, 153 A.3d 379 (Pa. Super. 2016) (right to a mechanic's lien is purely statutory and conditions must be strictly followed)
- Regency Investments, Inc. v. Inlander Ltd., 855 A.2d 75 (Pa. Super. 2004) (service requirements under the Mechanics' Lien Law are strictly construed)
- Crane Co. v. Rogers, 60 Pa. Super. 305 (Pa. Super. 1915) (historical precedent that failure to raise lien defects in defense waives later objection)
- Comm. ex rel. Penland v. Ashe, 19 A.2d 464 (Pa. 1941) (a judgment by a court without jurisdiction is void; jurisdictional limits must appear on face of judgment)