Chapter 87
87.001 to 87.060
NOTES OF DECISIONS
In
absence of express waiver by contractor of right to file construction lien,
agreement to arbitrate disputes did not prevent filing of lien and thereafter
foreclosing to recover unpaid amounts and costs and attorney fees incurred in
preparation, filing and foreclosure of lien claim. Harris v. Dyer, 50 Or App
223, 623 P2d 662 (1981), as modified by 292 Or 233, 637 P2d 918 (1981)
87.005
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Where
plaintiff, in course of preparation of land for construction of log dump,
provided drop boxes and hauled them away when filled with debris, this was act
of preparation for improvement to land within meaning of this section and gave
rise to mechanic’s lien under ORS 87.010. Abajian v.
Hill, 42 Or App 695, 601 P2d 837 (1979)
Subcontractor
is other person having charge of construction or preparation and therefore
qualifies as construction agent. Steel Products Co. v. Portland Gen. Elec., 291
Or 41, 628 P2d 1180 (1981)
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 41 WLR 95 (2005)
87.010
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Unpaid
subcontractor materialman could maintain action
against insurer on contractor’s bond, which promised to “pay all persons who
performed work”; overruling to extent of inconsistency, Tait & Co. v. D. Diamond Corp., 228 Or 602, 365 P2d 883
(1961). Jacobs Associates v. Argonaut Ins. Co., 282 Or 551, 580 P2d 529 (1978)
Specific
notice to materialman that check is intended for
payment on particular project requires that payment be credited toward lien on
that project. Empire Building Supply, Inc. v. EKO Investments, Inc., 40 Or App
739, 596 P2d 593 (1979)
Providing
drop boxes and hauling them away when filled with debris was act of preparation
for improvement to land and gave rise to lien under this section. Abajian v. Hill, 42 Or App 695, 601 P2d 837 (1979)
Damages
incurred as result of owner’s breach of contract that do not relate to anything
that became part of the improvement do not add any value to the improvement and
thus, although recoverable under general contract principles, are not subject
to statutory lien. Minter-Wilson Drilling Co. v. Richins,
60 Or App 702, 655 P2d 1060 (1982), Sup Ct review denied
Excavation
and grading of parking area come within definition of “improvement” and are lienable. Robertson, Hay & Wallace v. Kunkle, 69 Or App 99, 686 P2d 399 (1984)
Claims
relating to labor and materials performed and supplied off premises are lienable where lease required that work be done and
improvements enhanced value of mortgagee’s security interest. Robertson, Hay
& Wallace v. Kunkle, 69 Or App 99, 686 P2d 399
(1984)
Material
“to be used in” construction need not become part and parcel of improvement for
lien to attach. Rotarius v. Edwards, 147 Or App 484,
936 P2d 401 (1997)
Commingling
of lienable and nonlienable
charges does not invalidate lien if property owner has sufficient knowledge to
question amount of lien or can readily obtain sufficient information to
separate lienable and nonlienable
charges. A-C Construction, Inc. v. Bakke Corp., 153
Or App 41, 956 P2d 219 (1998), Sup Ct review denied
Lien
in favor of trustees of construction worker employee benefit plan is not
preempted by Employee Retirement Income Security Act. Trustees of Plumbers and
Pipefitters National Pension Fund v. Farmington Casualty Co., 33 F. Supp. 2d
904 (D. Or. 1998)
Labor
union, union benefit plan trustees and union collection agent are ineligible to
sue in representational capacity on behalf of union member who is “person
performing labor.” International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local No. 48
v. Oregon Steel Mills, Inc., 168 Or App 101, 5 P3d 1122 (2000), Sup Ct review
denied
Provision
allowing trustee of employee benefit plan
to file lien to collect payments due
plan is not preempted by Employee Retirement Income Security Act. International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local No. 48 v. Oregon Steel Mills, Inc., 168
Or App 101, 5 P3d 1122 (2000), Sup Ct review denied
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Validity of
mechanics lien in home solicitation sale where notice of cancellation not
given, (1974) Vol 37, p 316
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 41 WLR 95 (2005)
87.015
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Interest
of a vendor of land under a contract of sale is subject to a lien. Tri-City
Bldg. Center, Inc. v. Wagner, 274 Or 581, 548 P2d 961 (1976)
87.021
See
also annotations under ORS 87.020 in permanent edition.
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Pre-1983
version of this statute, providing that those who furnish material or supplies
must give delivery notice to owner of construction site as prerequisite to
enforceability of liens, does not apply to those who provide rental equipment.
Star Rentals, Inc. v. Seeberg Construction Co., 66 Or
App 822, 677 P2d 708 (1984), Sup Ct review denied
To
qualify as “labor upon an improvement,” the work of a subcontractor need not be
specified amount and such work may be primarily that of correcting errors.
Northwest Ironworks v. Rippling River, 71 Or App 144, 691 P2d 111 (1984), Sup
Ct review denied
This
section requires that notice of right to lien be given during progress of
improvement. Sun Solutions, Inc. v. Brandt, 300 Or 317, 709 P2d 1079 (1985)
Where
person performs labor upon commercial improvement or provides labor and
material for commercial improvement, notice of right to lien is not required if
person labors at site of commercial improvement. Teeny v. Haertl
Constructors, Inc., 314 Or 688, 842 P2d 788 (1992)
Where
subcontractor took measurements at commercial improvement site as incident to
supplying material, such contacts with job site are not labor on site within
notice requirement exception. Teeny v. Haertl
Constructors, Inc., 314 Or 688, 842 P2d 788 (1992)
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Enforcement by
subcontractor of lien rights against owner of residence where prime contractor
has failed to give proper notice or has been paid in full but failed to pay
subcontractor, (1981) Vol. 42, p 149
87.025
NOTES OF DECISIONS
This
statute does not require notice to holders of both prior and subsequently
recorded mortgages and thus the construction lien took precedence over mortgage
not recorded until after holder of the lien commenced to deliver materials to
the property. Hickey v. Polachek, 63 Or App 784, 666
P2d 294 (1983)
For
person claiming lien based on provision of materials to obtain priority over
prior mortgagee, lien claimant must provide mortgagee with notice of materials
provided, whether or not labor is also provided. Safeport,
Inc. v. Equipment Roundup & Manufacturing, Inc., 184 Or App 690, 60 P3d
1076 (2002), Sup Ct review denied
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 41 WLR 95 (2005)
87.030
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Because
“construction” refers to ongoing process of creating property improvement,
principle of constructive request does not apply where owner first becomes
aware of improvement after completion. Miller v. Ogden, 134 Or App 589, 896 P2d
596 (1995), aff’d 325 Or 248, 935 P2d 1205
(1997)
87.035
NOTES OF DECISIONS
In general
“Credits
and offsets” include only amounts between subcontractor and general or prime
contractor and do not include amounts between lienor
and third party. Jersey & Son Inc. v. Bailey Const. Co., 262 Or 491, 499
P2d 817 (1972)
Property
owners were not entitled to rely on labeling of items in lien claim where item
description did not mislead property owners as to amount of valid lien. Myers
v. Oregon Shores Associates, 69 Or App 624, 687 P2d 159 (1984), Sup Ct review
denied
Time for filing generally
When
builder, after substantial completion of structure, at request of owner, makes
additions to it which are useful or necessary to its
enjoyment, the final completion dates from time such additions are made.
Farrell v. Lacey, 264 Or 505, 507 P2d 31 (1973)
Even
though owner in fee of property may be subject to a lien unless he posts notice
of nonliability under ORS 87.030, the lien, to be
valid, must still be filed within time required by this section. Maddox v.
Balboa Raceways, Inc., 267 Or 321, 516 P2d 1293 (1973)
Where
improvements must necessarily be used as a unit and all are intended to be
immediately constructed, temporary interruptions beyond the control of the
owner or builder, will not interrupt or terminate the time within which to file
mechanic’s liens. Tri-City Bldg. Center, Inc. v. Wagner, 274 Or 581, 548 P2d
961 (1976)
Where
evidence showed construction project was abandoned, the 60-day time period for
filing a lien under this section would start to run 60 days after work ceased.
D.E.C. Eng. and Surveying v. G & J Invest., 57 Or App 742, 646 P2d 643
(1982)
Performance
of repair work under warranty did not extend time for filing lien claim.
Central Coast Electric v. Mendell, 66 Or App 42, 672
P2d 1224 (1983)
If
owner or mortgagee elects to post and record notice of completion as provided
in ORS 87.045, date of notice is determinative of completion date within the meaning
of this section. Star Rentals, Inc. v. Seeberg
Construction Co., 66 Or App 822, 677 P2d 708 (1984), Sup Ct review denied
Construction
was completed when pump was repaired and reinstalled because of laborer’s
contention that continuing malfunctions of pump were due to problems with well
itself and not with pump and time for filing lien began at that point. Austin
v. Carver, 85 Or App 529, 737 P2d 639 (1987)
Limitation
period for filing began running on date contractor ceased working on project
without regard to whether or not project was abandoned. Emmert
Industrial Corp. v. Sanders, 131 Or App 113, 883 P2d 1304 (1994), Sup Ct review
denied
Who are original contractors
“An
original contractor” is one who furnishes labor or material and labor on contract
direct with owner. Maddox v. Balboa Raceways, Inc., 267 Or 321, 516 P2d 1293
(1973)
One
who furnishes labor and materials on contract direct with a lessee from owner,
but not direct with owner, may be “original contractor” with respect to validity
of its lien against the lessee from owner, but is not an “original contractor”
with respect to validity of its lien against owner. Maddox v. Balboa Raceways,
Inc., 267 Or 321, 516 P2d 1293 (1973)
Description of property
Where
description of property in lien notice incorrectly stated address and tax lot
number and referred to business establishment on property by incorrect name,
but contained sufficient information to enable interested parties to identify
property and no prejudice was shown, there was substantial compliance with this
section and lien was valid. C-3 Builders, Inc. v. Krueger, 56 Or App 502, 642
P2d 344 (1982), Sup Ct review denied
Use
of word “description” by this section does not mean lien claim must contain
legal description of property covered by lien. C-3 Builders, Inc. v. Krueger,
56 Or App 502, 642 P2d 344 (1982), Sup Ct review denied
Description
requirement of general recordation statute does not apply to construction lien.
Bell Hardware v. Ed Szoyka Woodworking Co., 129 Or
App 332, 879 P2d 208 (1994), Sup Ct review denied
Whether
there has been substantial compliance with statutory requirement depends on
degree of noncompliance, underlying policy of requirement and prejudice that
property owner or third party may have suffered as result of noncompliance. C-3
Builders, Inc. v. Krueger, 56 Or App 502, 642 P2d 344 (1982), Sup Ct review
denied; Tigard Sand & Gravel Co. v. LBH Construction, 149 Or App 131,
941 P2d 1075 (1997)
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Enforcement by
subcontractor of lien rights against of residence owner where prime contractor
has failed to give proper notice or has been paid in full but failed to pay
subcontractor, (1981) Vol 42, p 149
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 41 WLR 95 (2005)
87.039
NOTES OF DECISIONS
It
was improper for trial court to deny costs and attorney fees under this section
where plaintiff gave notice in substantial compliance with the statutory
requirements. Laro Lumber Company v. Patrick, 52 Or
App 1035, 630 P2d 400 (1981)
87.045
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Where
evidence showed construction project was abandoned, the 60-day time period for
filing a lien under ORS 87.035 would start to run 60 days after work ceased.
D.E.C. Eng. and Surveying v. G & J Invest., 57 Or App 742, 646 P2d 643
(1982)
If
owner or mortgagee elects to post and record notice of completion, date of
notice is determinative of completion date within the meaning of ORS 87.035.
Star Rentals, Inc. v. Seeberg Construction Co., 66 Or
App 822, 677 P2d 708 (1984), Sup Ct review denied
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 41 WLR 95 (2005)
87.055
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Construction
lien could not be foreclosed against interest of owners of real property where lienor did not join owners as defendants to foreclosure
until more than six months after lien was filed. Wood Panel Structures v. Grangaard, 55 Or App 294, 637 P2d 1320 (1981)
87.057
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Mortgagee
is entitled to notice whether or not necessary party to foreclosure. Molalla
Pump & Heating Co. v. Chaney, 42 Or App 789, 602 P2d 874 (1979)
Where
defendant files surety bond guaranteeing payment of construction lien before
plaintiff commences action to foreclose lien, plaintiff’s failure to plead and
prove it gave mortgagee notice of intent to foreclose does not bar award of
attorney fees when mortgagee is neither necessary nor permissive party to
action. Morse Bros. Contractors v. C.J.H. Construction Co., 66 Or App 901, 675
P2d 1122 (1984)
87.060
NOTES OF DECISIONS
In general
This
section did not apply where the case was filed prior to the effective date of
this section. Harder Mechanical Contractors, Inc. v. Fairfield Erectors, Inc.,
278 Or 613, 564 P2d 1356 (1977)
Failure
to serve notice does not waive right to have action proceed with court sitting
as trier of fact in place of jury. B & D Investment
Corp. v. Petticord, 48 Or App 345, 617 P2d 276
(1980), Sup Ct review denied
Where
this section required claims to be tried to two different factfinders,
res judicata
and law of case did not preclude judge and jury from making different findings
concerning same fact on different claims in one action. Westwood Corp. v.
Bowen, 108 Or App 310, 815 P2d 1282 (1991)
Where
overstatement of lien amount is not result of fraud or gross negligence, lien
remains enforceable to extent of proper amount. Stricker
v. Taylor, 158 Or App 608, 975 P2d 930 (1999)
Surety
on release of lien bond need not be made party to underlying action to
foreclose lien against bond. Valencich v. TMT Homes
of Oregon, Inc., 193 Or App 47, 88 P3d 300 (2004)
Attorney fees
In
suit to foreclose mechanic’s lien where trial court denied foreclosure of lien
but awarded plaintiff $200 and also awarded $1000 in attorney fees to defendant
as “prevailing party” and on day of trial defendant paid into court sum of $200
for “extra” work, defendant was prevailing party entitled to recover costs
under ORS 20.180, including attorney fees as provided by this section. Cloyd v. McPherson, 283 Or 137, 582 P2d 423 (1978)
Where
third-party defendant stipulated that it was responsible for any damages
defendant might be awarded for unmerchantable pipe,
attorney fees awarded to defendant under lien foreclosure statute were properly
transferred to third-party defendant when it failed to object to award of
attorney fees on counterclaim and conceded its primary liability for defect
which gave rise to counterclaim. Davison v. Parker, 50 Or App 129, 622 P2d 1113
(1981), Sup Ct review denied
In
absence of express waiver by contractor of right to file construction lien,
agreement to arbitrate disputes did not prevent filing of lien and thereafter
foreclosing to recover unpaid amounts and costs and attorney fees incurred in
preparation, filing and foreclosure of lien claim. Harris v. Dyer, 50 Or App
223, 623 P2d 662 (1981), as modified by 292 Or 233, 637 P2d 918 (1981)
Where
notice of filing of lien was given by regular mail instead of by registered or
certified mail and defendant admitted receipt of notice, there was substantial
compliance with statutory notice requirements and denial of attorney fees and costs
was improper. Laro Lumber Company v. Patrick, 52 Or
App 1035, 630 P2d 400 (1981)
Where
plaintiffs recovered $180 more than total of defendant’s tender and successful
counterclaim, plaintiff was prevailing party, but since plaintiffs’ foreclosure
suit failed they were not entitled to attorney fees under this section. King v.
Suniga, 54 Or App 267, 634 P2d 812 (1981)
Where
plaintiff voluntarily dismissed construction lien foreclosure action pursuant
to ORCP 54A as to some defendants, those defendants could recover costs and
attorney fees pursuant to this section. Precision Roof Trusses, Inc. v. Devitt, 59 Or App 4, 650 P2d 152 (1982)
Where
defendants did not object to plaintiff’s failure to give notice required by ORS
87.039, they could not complain of failure to give statutory notice.
Minter-Wilson Drilling Co. v. Richins, 60 Or App 702,
655 P2d 1060 (1982), Sup Ct review denied
Bank
that successfully moved to dismiss claim by construction lienor
to foreclose its lien was not entitled to attorney fees where court found that
bank’s trust deed was prior to construction lien and not that construction lien
was invalid. Bones Construction Co. v. En Stone I, Ltd., 89 Or App 530, 749 P2d
1217 (1988)
Where
arbitrator refused to award attorney fees and reservation of rights clause made
arbitration nonexclusive remedy, court could award attorney fees incurred in
arbitration. ASB Construction v. Bateman, 124 Or App 638, 863 P2d 516 (1993)
Where
contract provides that contractual remedies are in addition to remedies at law,
court may include attorney fees incurred through contractual remedies as part
of reasonable amount of attorney fees at trial. Westwood Construction Company
v. Hallmark Inns & Resorts, Inc., 182 Or App 624, 50 P3d 238 (2002), Sup Ct
review denied
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 9 WLJ 361 (1973)
87.070
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Claim
for extra transportation charges for “dry runs” which were made at request of
defendant after parties had entered into contract was not lienable
item, as it was not part of parties’ contract. King v. Suniga,
54 Or App 267, 634 P2d 812 (1981)
Value
of subcontractor lien is limited to amount due to subcontractor under
subcontract. L.H. Morris Electric, Inc. v. Hyundai Semiconductor America, Inc.,
203 Or App 54, 125 P3d 1 (2005), Sup Ct review denied
87.078
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Where
person obtaining bond fails to give notice of bond filing to lien claimant,
lien claimant’s remedy remains exclusively against property subject to lien.
Tualatin Valley Builders Supply, Inc. v. TMT Homes of Oregon, Inc., 179 Or App
575, 41 P3d 429 (2002)
87.083
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Surety
on release of lien bond need not be made party to underlying action to
foreclose lien against bond. Valencich v. TMT Homes
of Oregon, Inc., 193 Or App 47, 88 P3d 300 (2004)
87.093
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Location
of structure on residential lot does not control whether contract is for
residential construction or improvement. Calapooia
Pole Structures, Inc. v. Moulder, 128 Or App 190, 875
P2d 495 (1994)
87.152
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Where
materials and labor involved in installation of oil cooler assembly were not
provided at request of owner, repair shop did not establish right to possessory
lien under this section. United Engine Parts v. Ried,
283 Or 421, 584 P2d 275 (1978)
87.162
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Rented
furniture brought on premises by tenant was not “owned by tenant” within
meaning of this section, and thus landlord’s sale of such furniture under
alleged landlord’s lien constituted conversion of property of lessor of the furniture. Chapman Bros. v. Miles-Hiatt
Investments, 282 Or 643, 580 P2d 540 (1978)
Plaintiff’s
security interest prevailed over landlord’s lien. Briggs v. Thompson, 287 Or
223, 598 P2d 296 (1979)
87.166
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Even
though defendants did not comply with 20-day requirement when they took
possession of plaintiff’s chattels, court could find on record that defendants’
acts did not rise to level of conversion. Jordan v. Wilhelm, 95 Or App 528, 770
P2d 74 (1989), Sup Ct review denied
87.222
NOTES OF DECISIONS
“Another”
person who obtains timber refers to third-party harvester of standing timber,
not to purchaser of timber felled and delivered by seller’s agent. Olcott v. Rogge Wood Products, Inc., 146 Or App 264, 932
P2d 1204 (1997)
87.226
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Whether
there has been substantial compliance with statutory requirement depends on
degree of noncompliance, underlying policy of requirement and prejudice that
property owner or third party may have suffered as result of noncompliance.
McGregor Co. v. Heritage, 291 Or 420, 631 P2d 1355 (1981)
Plaintiff’s
agricultural liens were not invalid as matter of law because nonlienable security described in lien notice was segregable from lienable security
without extrinsic evidence and item containing both lienable
and nonlienable items could be disregarded. Hitchman v. Burkey, 95 Or App
508, 769 P2d 799 (1989), Sup Ct review denied
87.236
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Agricultural
services lien did not extend to proceeds of sale of potato crop where there was
no claim of substantial compliance with conditions imposed by this section.
McGregor Co. v. Heritage, 291 Or 420, 631 P2d 1355 (1981)
87.242
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Absent
showing of prejudice, substantial compliance, in good faith, with requirements
of this section is sufficient. McGregor v. Heritage, 49 Or App 489, 620 P2d 488
(1980), aff’d as modified291 Or 420,
631 P2d 1355 (1981)
87.332
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Cases
that interpret former ORS 87.675 are not necessarily applicable in interpreting
this section because this section is not merely rewriting former section.
C&V, Inc. v. DAW Forest Products Co., 85 Or App 58, 735 P2d 1244 (1987)
Notice
given by filing lien with Secretary of State pursuant to ORS 87.242 is
sufficient to sustain action against party not receiving direct notice. Green
Valley Industries, Inc. v. Keech, 120 Or App 596, 853
P2d 318 (1993)
87.352
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Rock
crushing operation which, by terms of agreements between parties, produced
primary product of mine and therefore was essential to mine’s operation
constituted “working or operation of a mine” under this section. O.O., Inc. v.
Cape Mountain Rock Products, 77 Or App 159, 712 P2d 159 (1985)
87.358
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 69 OLR 849 (1990)
87.430 to 87.490
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 27 WLR 891 (1991)
87.430
NOTES OF DECISIONS
This
section did not authorize attorney to endorse client’s name to check made
jointly to attorney and client. In re Boothe, 303 Or
643, 740 P2d 785 (1987)
Fees
secured by payment of retainer prior to filing of bankruptcy petition are
available to satisfy attorney’s claim for services
rendered following filing of petition. In re Century Cleaning Services, Inc.,
202 B.R. 149 (Bkrtcy. D. Or. 1996)
Attorney’s
lien becomes effective upon possession of client’s property or money. In re
Century Cleaning Services, Inc., 215 B.R. 18 (9th Cir. BAP 1997)
Attorney
for chapter 7 debtor may be compensated for post-petition work based on unavoided prepetition secured lien. In re Century Cleaning
Services, Inc., 215 B.R. 18 (9th Cir. BAP 1997)
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 27 WLR 891 (1991)
87.440
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 27 WLR 891 (1991)
87.445 to 87.480
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 27 WLR 891 (1991)
87.445
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Where
there was no evidence in record that clients expected to be accountable for
fees of attorney associated with lead counsel and agreement was that lead
counsel would pay associated attorneys, lien for reasonable value of associate’s
services as measured by quantum meruit did not arise under this section. Hohn v. Oregon Physicians’ Service, 786 F2d 1353 (1985)
Payment
of settlement amount by defendant to plaintiff does not excuse defendant from
liability for attorney’s lien by plaintiff’s attorney. Potter v. Schlesser Co., Inc., 335 Or 209, 63 P3d 1172 (2003)
Lien
is charge on action, suit or proceeding, not on proceeds derived from action,
suit or proceeding. Pereira v. Thompson, 230 Or App 640, 217 P3d 236 (2009)
87.475
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Liability
insurer repayment to other insurer for amount of Personal Injury Protection
payment advanced by other insurer is reduction in judgment amount having
priority over attorney lien on judgment. Willhite v. Biff’s Seafood Restaurant, Inc., 124 Or App 360, 862 P2d
580 (1993)
Payment
of settlement amount by defendant to plaintiff does not excuse defendant from
liability for attorney’s lien by plaintiff’s attorney. Potter v. Schlesser Co., Inc., 335 Or 209, 63 P3d 1172 (2003)
87.485
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Interpleader action is not “suit to foreclose” attorney’s
lien for purposes of allowing attorney fees under this section. Rockwood Water
Dist. v. Steve Smith Contracting, 80 Or App 136, 720 P2d 1332 (1986), Sup Ct review
denied
87.490
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Attorney’s
lien is superior to garnishment based on money judgment because money judgment
is not “personal property” for purposes of that exception of this section to
superiority of attorneys’ liens. Rockwood Water Dist. v. Steve Smith
Contracting, 80 Or App 136, 720 P2d 1332 (1986), Sup Ct review denied
This
section does not give attorney’s lien priority over judgment debtor’s right of
setoff. Ketcham v. Selles,
96 Or App 121, 772 P2d 419 (1989), Sup Ct review denied
87.501
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Attorney
fees incurred to collect lien may not be included in lien amount as
administrative cost of “care.” King City Rehab, LLC v. Clackamas County, 214 Or
App 333, 164 P3d 1190 (2007)
87.539
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Tender
of amount claimed in notice of lien is sufficient to trigger obligation to
discharge lien. King City Rehab, LLC v. Clackamas County, 214 Or App 333, 164
P3d 1190 (2007)
87.565
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Time
requirement for filing notice of lien under this section is not jurisdictional,
so as to render a lien void for failure to comply with such time requirement.
Rogue Valley Memorial Hosp. v. Salem Ins. Agency, 265 Or 603, 510 P2d 845
(1973)
87.585
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 27 WLR 562 (1991)
87.855
NOTES OF DECISIONS
The
benefit plan lien extends only to an employer’s earnings or property owned by
him which is used in the operation of his business and not to real property in
which an employer has no ownership. Pio v. ADCCO,
Love’s Enterprises, Inc./Kent, 267 Or 540, 517 P2d 1189 (1974)