Yeadon Fabric Domes, Inc. v. Maine Sports Complex, LLC
Maine Supreme Judicial Court
901 A.2d 200 (2006)
- Written by Douglas Halasz, JD
Facts
In 2001, Maine Sports Complex, LLC (MSC) (defendant) made business deals with several parties related to construction of a sports complex. MSC hired Kiser & Kiser Company (Kiser) to perform engineering services. Kiser began its services on December 3, 2001. MSC hired Harriman Brothers, Inc. (Harriman) to perform groundwork. Harriman began its work on December 7, 2001. Yeadon Fabric Domes, Inc. (Yeadon) (plaintiff) sold MSC an inflatable, fabric dome and related materials and equipment. Yeadon filed a financing statement with the Secretary of State for the dome and equipment on July 22, 2002. MSC eventually defaulted on its agreements with all these parties. Harriman filed a lien on August 27, 2002, and sued to enforce its lien on October 17, 2002. Kiser filed a lien on November 18, 2002, and sued to enforce its lien on February 10, 2003. Yeadon brought a forcible entry and detainer action for personalty against MSC. A hearing was held on July 21, 2003. The court dismissed Yeadon’s action because it concluded that the dome was a fixture, not personal property. Yeadon recorded a financing statement in the Penobscot County Registry of Deeds on February 27, 2004. Thereafter, Yeadon filed a collection action against MSC, which the district court consolidated with Harriman and Kiser’s statutory claims to enforce their mechanic’s liens. The district court issued a final judgment giving Yeadon last priority. Yeadon appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Calkins, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 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.