Lee’s Home Center, Inc. v. Akins
Tennessee Court of Appeals
1992 WL 117051 (1992)
- Written by Robert Cane, JD
Facts
The Akinses (collectively, Akins) (defendants) sought to build a new home, so Akins hired a general contractor. The general contractor dealt with all subcontractors for the project. Akins had no part in arranging the purchase of materials or the work done by subcontractors. Lee’s Home Center, Incorporated (Lee’s) (plaintiff) was one of the subcontractors that was hired by the general contractor to deliver materials for construction. Lee’s delivered materials as agreed. However, the general contractor never paid Lee’s even though Akins paid the general contractor in full. Lee’s filed a notice, claiming a construction lien and sued Akins to foreclose the lien. The trial court found that a mechanic’s lien arose as a matter of law from the delivery of materials and granted summary judgment in favor of Lee’s and ordered foreclosure of the lien. Akins appealed, arguing that paying for the materials twice (i.e., once to the general contractor and now to Lee’s, the subcontractor) was improper.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.