Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
TOWN & COUNTRY LINOLEUM & CARPET CO., INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Daniel A. TROPEA and Toni Ann Tropea, Defendants-Respondents.
Supreme Court erred in granting reargument and, upon reargument, vacating the order dated March 13, 1998 and denying plaintiff's motion for summary judgment in this action to enforce a mechanic's lien. Plaintiff, a subcontractor that provided materials and services in connection with the construction of defendants' residence, established that, at the time the lien was filed, there was an amount due and owing on the contract between defendants and the contractor (see, Lien Law § 4[1]; Bunce, Ltd. v. Fahey, 73 A.D.2d 632, 633, 423 N.Y.S.2d 58). Defendants argue that, at the time the lien was filed, they had already overpaid the contractor. Defendants failed, however, to submit evidence sufficient to raise an issue of fact, either in opposition to the original motion or in support of their motion to reargue. Although defendants established that they made payments to the contractor and the contractor withheld payment from the subcontractors, defendants failed to raise an issue of fact whether they had made payments in excess of the contract price at the time the lien was filed (see, West-Fair Elec. Contrs. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 87 N.Y.2d 148, 157-158, 638 N.Y.S.2d 394, 661 N.E.2d 967; Lien Law § 4[1] ). Payments were made by defendants to a subcontractor to which the contractor had assigned his right to payment under the contract. Those payments, made after the lien was filed, do not defeat plaintiff's lien because the assignment was not filed as required by Lien Law § 15 (see, Edison Elec. Illuminating Co. of Brooklyn v. Frick Co., 221 N.Y. 1, 6-8, 116 N.E. 369).
Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion for reargument denied and order dated March 13, 1998 reinstated.
MEMORANDUM:
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: June 18, 1999
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)