405 P.3d 778
Utah Ct. App.2017Background
- In 2008 Total Restoration performed flood‑remediation work on the Merritts’ home and was not paid. Total recorded a mechanic’s lien and sued to foreclose.
- The trial court originally held the lien valid; the Merritts counterclaimed for breach of contract, wrongful lien, and abuse of lien right.
- On prior appeal the Court of Appeals held Total Restoration’s lien was invalid because basic flood‑remediation work is not lienable, and remanded for reconsideration of the counterclaims. (Total Restoration, Inc. v. Merritt)
- On remand the trial court found the lien invalid but not wrongful, reasoning the lien was plausible when recorded (pre‑dating All Clean v. Timberline) and therefore not wrongful.
- The trial court denied Total Restoration’s request for attorney fees under the Wrongful Lien Act but awarded appellate costs to the Merritts under Utah R. App. P. 34.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the fee ruling (no entitlement to fees where lien is invalid but not wrongful) but reversed the costs award because the Merritts missed the rule 34 deadline to file their bill of costs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Total Restoration) | Defendant's Argument (Merritt) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Wrongful Lien Act permits attorney fees where a lien is invalid but not wrongful | Fees permissible because lien was not wrongful; claimant should recover fees | Fees not available unless lien is valid; if lien is wrongful petitioner gets fees | Held: Fees require a valid lien (or a wrongful lien for petitioner). Invalid but not wrongful lien yields no attorney‑fee award to either side |
| Whether the trial court properly awarded appellate costs to the Merritts under Utah R. App. P. 34 | N/A (Total challenges award) | Merritts sought costs for prior appeal | Held: Reversed — Merritts’ bill of costs was filed ~10 months after remittitur, missing the 15‑day deadline, so costs not recoverable |
Key Cases Cited
- Total Restoration, Inc. v. Merritt, 338 P.3d 836 (Utah Ct. App. 2014) (prior appeal holding flood‑remediation work not lienable under the mechanics’ lien statute)
- Carter v. University of Utah Med. Center, 150 P.3d 467 (Utah 2006) (standard of review for statutory interpretation)
- Arbogast Family Trust v. River Crossings, LLC, 238 P.3d 1035 (Utah 2010) (standard of review for interpretation of procedural rules)
- Bay Harbor Farm, LC v. Sumsion, 329 P.3d 46 (Utah Ct. App. 2014) (illustrative discussion regarding fee awards under the Wrongful Lien Act)
- Price‑Orem Inv. Co. v. Rollins, Brown & Gunnell, Inc., 784 P.2d 475 (Utah Ct. App. 1989) (party ineligible for appellate costs when bill of costs filed well after the rule‑34 deadline)
- Smith v. Fairfax Realty, Inc., 82 P.3d 1064 (Utah 2003) (distinguishing grounds; cited in relation to costs deadlines)