ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Construction Law Blogs -> The South Carolina Construction Law Blog

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Construction Law

: The South Carolina Construction Law Blog

SC Supreme Court Rules that Posting a Bond Does Not Affect the Time Deadline in which a Party Must Commence a Suit to Enforce a Mechanic?s Lien

By Ryan McCabe

ADVERTISEMENTS

   After filing a mechanic?s lien, a party has six months to commence a suit to enforce the lien. See S.C. Code Ann. § 29-5-120. Failure to enforce a lien within the six month statutory period deprives the party of the remedies available under the mechanic?s lien statutes. When faced with a mechanic?s lien, the property owner can post a bond, which discharges the lien and allows the owner to convey the property free and clear of the lien despite the existence of an enforcement action against the property. See See S.C. Code Ann. § 29-5-110.

   In Cohen?s Drywall Co. Inc. v. Sea Spray Homes, LLC et al., (July 23, 2007), the South Carolina Supreme Court addressed the question of whether Cohen timely filed an action to enforce a mechanic?s lien. The company filed the lien, timely commenced an action for enforcement, and identified the home as the subject of the enforcement action; however, subsequent to filing the lien, the company discovered that the property owners had posted a bond. In response, the company amended its Complaint to identify the bond, instead of the lien, as the subject of the enforcement action. The trial court granted the property owners? Motion to Dismiss, reasoning that Cohen?s Drywall failed to commence an action for enforcement within the six month statutory time period since it did not file its Amended Complaint identifying the bond as the subject of the enforcement action until after six months from the date the company filed the lien.

   The Supreme Court disagreed and ruled that the mechanic?s lien statutes do not require a party to bring an enforcement action against a bond. Since there is no such requirement, Cohen?s Drywall did not have to amend its Complaint to identify the bond as the subject of the enforcement action. The Supreme Court?s ruling was based on the simple fact that none of the mechanic?s lien statutes require a party to substitute a bond as the subject of an enforcement action. An enforcement action naming the property as the subject of the action is sufficient to secure foreclosure on any subsequent bond.

   This site and any information contained herein is intended for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. Seek a competent attorney for advice on any legal matter.


Full post as published by The South Carolina Construction Law Blog on August 21, 2007 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0159 secs (new cache)