Cal Sierra Construction, Inc. v. Comerica Bank

Good Law
142 Cal. Rptr. 3d 166·2012 Cal. App. LEXIS 641·206 Cal. App. 4th 841·2012 WL 1950216·12 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5987
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 31, 2012No. C060707California3,750 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hull, J.

In Connolly Development, Inc. v. Superior Court (1976) 17 Cal.3d 803 [ 132 Cal.Rptr. 477 , 553 P.2d 637 ] (Connolly), the California Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the state’s mechanic’s lien and stop notice laws against a claim that they permit a taking of an owner’s property without due process. The court concluded the procedures available to a property owner to obtain interim relief from unjustified claims before the claimant files suit on the lien or stop notice provide sufficient safeguards against such claims delaying or otherwise interfering with a construction project until the dispute can be resolved. (Id. at pp. 808, 827-828.)

In Lambert v. Superior Court (1991) 228 Cal.App.3d 383 [ 279 Cal.Rptr. 32 ] (Lambert), the Court of Appeal pointed out that where a claimant has already filed suit to enforce a mechanic’s lien or stop notice, the procedures identified in Connolly may no longer be available to the property owner. In such case, the owner may instead file a motion in the enforcement action to have the matter examined by the trial court. On such motion, the claimant bears the burden of establishing the “probable validity” of the claim…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.