Category Archives: Mechanics’ Liens

August 28, 2014

Amended notice of intent unnecessary when amending lien amount

By Tim Gordon

In addition to addressing the propriety of a property description, the boundaries of blanket liens, and the appropriateness of apportionment, in August of 2014, a division of the Court of Appeals held that lien claimants need not serve a new notice of intent before recording an amended lien where the only amendment is the amount of the lien.  Sure-Shock Electric, Inc. v. Diamond Lofts Venture, LLC, 2014 COA 111.

Read more >>

April 4, 2013

Contractor Cannot Avoid Contractual Limitation To Fee By Filing Lien For “Value” Of Work

By Tim Gordon

In Byerly v. Bank of Colorado, et al., 2013 COA 35, a division of the Colorado Court of Appeals held that the value of a general contractor’s mechanic’s lien is always limited to the contract price, even where the owner has not filed the contract with the clerk and recorder’s office.  Thus, the language in C.R.S. § 38-22-101(3) providing that “such persons shall have a lien for the value thereof” when the contract is not filed applies only to subcontractors and material suppliers.  As such, the general contractor’s mecanics’ lien recorded for the “value” of the general contractor’s work instead of the amount allowed under its contract was excessive.

Read more >>

April 19, 2012

Court of Appeals Recognizes Limitations to Relation-Back Doctrine

By Tim Gordon

Before a potential developer purchases property for a new project, it needs to secure financing.  Before the lender will agree to finance the project, it wants to be satisfied that the project has or will be granted the requisite entitlements.  And before the requisite entitlements can be obtained, preliminary design work must be performed.  As a result, design professionals often perform site planning and other design work before the developer even purchases the real property.  A somewhat-similar scenario happened in Oz Architecture of Denver, Inc. v. V3 Companies of Colorado, Ltd. (Colo. App. April 19, 2012) (not published pursuant to C.A.R. 35(f)).

Read more >>

January 12, 2012

Court of Appeals defines the scope of the relation-back doctrine in light of intervening conveyances

By Tim Gordon

In Ferguson Enterprises, Inc. v. Keybuild Solutions, Inc. et al., (Colo. App. Dec. 22, 2011), the Court of Appeals had to address the priorities when mechanics’ liens and multiple deed-of-trust foreclosures collide.  While reaffirming and compiling several previously-established propositions of law in this area, the Court also addressed some novel issues.

The Owners and Deed-of-Trust Foreclosures Read more >>

August 9, 2011

Including accrued interest in lien statement does not render it void as excessive

By Tim Gordon

In Honnen Equipment Company, Inc. v. Never Summer Backhoe Service, Inc. (Colo. App. July 7, 2011), a division of the Colorado Court of Appeals held that the inclusion of interest in a lien statement does not render the lien void as an excessive lien.  In doing so, the Court had to distinguish prior Supreme Court precedent holding that a mechanics’ lien may not include late charges.

Read more >>

June 15, 2011

Governor signs bill remedying lis pendens problem with Weize Company, LLC v. Martz Supply Co.

By Tim Gordon

Earlier this month, the Governor signed into law Senate Bill 11-264.  The purpose of SB 11-264 is to abrogate the part of Weize Company, LLC v. Martz Supply Co. holding that a lis pendens must be recorded in a claim against a lien substitution bond.  The new law amends various sections of Colorado's mechanics' lien statute to clarify that a lis pendens or a notice of commencement of action shall not be recorded in cases where a mechanics' lien has been properly bonded over.  The new law takes effect July 1, 2011.

September 3, 2010

Capital Infusions Are Now Trust Funds Too

By Tim Gordon

NOTE:  The Supreme Court of Colorado reversed the Court of Appeals’ decision in AC Excavating, Inc. v. YaleSee here.

 

In AC Excavating, Inc. v. Yale (Colo. App. Sept. 2, 2010), the Colorado Court of Appeals held that money loaned to an LLC by its manager qualifies as a disbursement, and can be the basis of a trust fund violation and theft claim against the manager if the funds are not used to pay subcontractors and suppliers.  As the dissent notes, “[a] lawyer familiar with today’s holding likely would advise the manager not to recapitalize the company if there was any doubt as to the project’s ultimate success.”

Read more >>

June 10, 2010

Lis Pendens Still Required, Even If Mechanics’ Lien Is Bonded

By Tim Gordon

[EDIT – The Colorado Legislature has since passed, and the Governor has signed, Senate Bill 11-264, which abrogates the holding in Weize for lawsuits brought after July 1, 2011.  See here for details.]

Today, in Weize Company, LLC v. Martz Supply Co., 09CA1369 (Colo. App. June 10, 2010), a division of the Colorado Court of Appeals held that a subcontractor suing to enforce its rights to a mechanics’ lien that has been substituted by a bond and thus discharged must still record a lis pendens.  So, according to the Court of Appeals, bonding over a mechanics’ lien will not clear title, despite the clear language of the statute.

Read more >>