Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Insul-Acoustics, Inc. v. Sung Soo Lee
Citations: 136 Cal. App. 3d 552; 186 Cal. Rptr. 324; 1982 Cal. App. LEXIS 2039Docket: Civ. 63191
Court: California Court of Appeal; October 14, 1982; California; State Appellate Court
Insul-Acoustics, Inc. filed a complaint to foreclose a mechanic's lien against Sung Soo Lee, who operates a store under a lease in the Oaks Mall. The trial court granted summary judgment favoring Lee, determining that Insul-Acoustics’ lien was not timely recorded as per Civil Code section 3116. The facts showed that Lee, as a tenant, contracted with Realty Design for store fixturization, which Realty Design then subcontracted to Insul-Acoustics for drywall and acoustical ceiling work. Insul-Acoustics provided a preliminary notice of work on May 18, 1978, and completed the work by July 31, 1978. Although Lee paid Realty Design, the latter did not compensate Insul-Acoustics, which recorded its lien on December 8, 1978, exceeding the 90-day requirement post-completion. Insul-Acoustics argued that the "work of improvement" should encompass not just their work for Lee but also similar work for other tenants, thereby justifying the late filing. The court rejected this argument, clarifying that each tenant's improvements were distinct and not interconnected. Each job was governed by separate contracts, and as such, Insul-Acoustics’ lien was unenforceable due to the failure to file within the required timeframe following the completion of work at Lee's store. The court found no grounds to consider the improvements across different stores as a single project, affirming that Lee held no responsibility for other tenants' improvements. A single lien cannot be filed for multiple improvements requested by one owner or lessee under Civil Code section 3130, as illustrated by Hammond Lumber Co. v. Goldberg. The judgment affirming this principle is upheld, with concurrence from Feinerman, P.J. and Hastings, J. According to Civil Code section 3116, claimants other than original contractors must record their lien claims within specific timeframes after completing their work. This case does not pertain to the mall's construction or its general contractor, Ernest W. Hahn, Inc., which opened on April 27, 1978. On May 30, 1978, Village Associates recorded a completion notice dated May 24, 1978. Additionally, the plaintiff filed separate claims in December 1978 for work done at individual tenant shops.