Conn. Gen. Stat. » Title 49 — MORTGAGES AND LIENS · Chapter 847 — Liens
Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 49-36 (2026)

Liens limited; apportionment; payments to original contractor

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) No mechanic's lien may attach to any building or its appurtenances, or to the land on which the same stands, or any lot, or any plot of land, in favor of any person, to a greater amount in the whole than the price which the owner agreed to pay for the building and its appurtenances or the development of any such lot, or the development of any such plot of land.

(b) When there are several claimants and the amount of their united claims exceeds that price, the claimants, other than the original contractor, shall be first paid in full, if the amount of that price is sufficient for that purpose; but, if not, it shall be apportioned among the claimants having the liens, other than the original contractor, in proportion to the amount of the debts due them respectively; and the court having jurisdiction thereof, on application of any person interested, may direct the manner in which the claims shall be paid.

(c) In determining the amount to which any lien or liens may attach upon any land or building, or lot or plot of land, the owner of the land or building or lot or plot of land shall be allowed whatever payments he has made, in good faith, to the original contractor or contractors, before receiving notice of the lien or liens. No payments made in advance of the time stipulated in the original contract may be considered as made in good faith, unless notice of intention to make the payment has been given in writing to each person known to have furnished materials or rendered services at least five days before the payment is made.

(1949 Rev., S. 7220; P.A. 74-310, S. 4; P.A. 79-602, S. 92.)

History: P.A. 74-310 applied provisions with respect to lots, plots of land and development of such land; P.A. 79-602 divided section into Subsecs., substituted “may” for “shall” and “the”, etc. for “such” and made other slight changes in wording.

Owner is to be allowed for bona fide payments to original contractor before notice, though made in advance. 27 C. 578. Owner cannot waive defect in notice of intent so as to make lien valid as against others claiming liens. 42 C. 541. Owner not allowed for payments made after notice to him by subcontractor, although he had, before such notice, verbally guaranteed contractor's debts, in performance of which guaranty he made such payments. 43 C. 14. Limitation of amount of liens generally. 73 C. 519. Effect of abandonment of work by contractor. Id., 452; 82 C. 244; 87 C. 686; 89 C. 254. Effect of alteration in original contract; of payment made before notice of lien; of payment made in advance of time agreed on. 74 C. 493; 81 C. 502; 89 C. 254; 131 C. 643. Payment of subcontractor by contractor will not defeat lien of one to whom former has sublet part of work. 76 C. 107. Subcontractor has no greater rights than his principal. 81 C. 632; 82 C. 244; 96 C. 225. Effect of direct payments by mortgagee holding advance payment mortgage to contractor, at request of mortgagor. 82 C. 244. Effect of contract providing for payments as work progresses under which weekly payments are made and contract price is fully paid. 84 C. 487. What constitutes “notice” of subcontractor's lien. Id.; 91 C. 712. What constitutes knowledge in provision for advance payments. 89 C. 262. Right of subcontractors where one gives notice, owner thereafter makes payments on contract, and then others give notice. 92 C. 482. Duty of owner as to withholding payments after receiving notice. Id., 485. No priority between subcontractors under same original contractor. 99 C. 343; 108 C. 243. Cited. 109 C. 364; Id., 554; 113 C. 10; 115 C. 199. Finding of fraud between owner and principal contractor. 111 C. 132. Priority of materialmen over contractor not removed by assumption by owner to pay them. 116 C. 277. In action to foreclose lien of subcontractor, original contractor a necessary party. 118 C. 614. Payments made in advance of the time when they are due under the contract and without notice to the lienor are ineffective as to him in reducing the amount due on the contract. 143 C. 146. Cited. 147 C. 351; 168 C. 371; 169 C. 76; 180 C. 501; 181 C. 592; 182 C. 568. Challenge by general contractor to constitutionality of mechanic's lien statutes discussed. 185 C. 583.

Cited. 27 CA 199; 39 CA 122. Defendant, despite having paid general contractor the original contract price in full, still owed general contractor for “extras” and therefore a lienable fund existed and subcontractor's lien was not invalid. 136 CA 184. When the general contractor is not in default, unless there were payments made in bad faith, the lienable fund is the amount still owed by the property owner to the general contractor at the time the property owner receives the notice of the lien pursuant to Sec. 49-34, regardless of whether it continues to make payments to the nondefaulted general contractor. 196 CA 430.

Cited. 15 CS 360; 23 CS 380.

Cited. 2 Conn. Cir. Ct. 620. Only payments made to original contractor in good faith before notice of subcontractor's lien are allowed owner. 6 Conn. Cir. Ct. 512.

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)		 (Return to
List of Chapters)		 (Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 21 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1960–2021 · leading case: Rene Dry Wall Co. v. Strawberry Hill Assocs., 438 A.2d 774 (Conn. 1980).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Rene Dry Wall Co. v. Strawberry Hill Assocs., 438 A.2d 774 (Conn. 1980). · cites it 11× “General Statutes § 49-36. Although § 49-36 does require pro rata allocation of proceeds among unpaid subcontractors, that provision does not come into play until it is determined that there are net proceeds available for distribution, taking into account the diminutions from the…”
W. G. Glenney Co. v. Bianco, 604 A.2d 1345 (Conn. App. Ct. 1992). · cites it 10× “The defendants claim that the trial court improperly (1) rendered judgment without joining the general contractor as a party to this action, (2) found that the defendants prevented the general contractor from completing performance, and (3) refused to apportion the debt owed by…”
Seaman v. Climate Control Corp., 436 A.2d 271 (Conn. 1980). · cites it 6× “General Statutes § 49-36. These general observations help to clarify what is not at issue in this case.”
FCM Grp., Inc. v. Miller, 17 A.3d 40 (Conn. 2011). · cites it 4× “18 General Statutes § 49-36 provides in relevant part: “(a) No mechanic’s lien may attach to any building or its appurtenances, or to the land on which the same stands, or any lot, or any plot of land, in favor of any person, to a greater amount in the whole than the price which…”
Johnson v. De Toledo, 763 A.2d 28 (Conn. App. Ct. 2000). · cites it 7× “In response, the homeowners assert that because Basli was to construct the patio and the retaining wall under the original contract, they are entitled to a $17,500 credit.”
Gen. Elec. Supply Co. v. S. New England Tel. Co., 441 A.2d 581 (Conn. 1981). · cites it 5× “They maintain instead that the general contractor is adversely affected by the imposition of a lien on the property of the owner, because the result of notice of a lien is invariably to freeze assets to which the general contractor would otherwise be entitled. Section 49-36 of…”
Thompson & Peck, Inc. v. Div. Drywall, Inc., 696 A.2d 326 (Conn. 1997). · cites it 3× “ng and appurtenances or lot or in the event that the materials were furnished or services were rendered in the site development or subdivision of any plot of land, then on the plot of land and the claim takes precedence over any other encumbrance originating after the…”
Spearhead Constr. Corp. v. Bianco, 665 A.2d 86 (Conn. App. Ct. 1995). · cites it 4× “” The defendants sought to reduce the Glenney claim by application of the apportionment statute, General Statutes § 49-36 (b). 2 Their *127 argument was that the sum of Glenney’s claim for $55,185.”
Gill v. Diorio, 720 A.2d 526 (Conn. App. Ct. 1998). · cites it 6× “The owners and tenant claimed, therefore, that Aqua did not have standing to allege its claims pursuant to General Statutes § 49-36 (c). 6 Aqua opposed the motion *144 to dismiss arguing that the trial court, as a court of general jurisdiction, had subject matter jurisdiction…”
PROBUILD EAST, LLC v. Poffenberger, 45 A.3d 654 (Conn. App. Ct. 2012). · cites it 5× “” 5 General Statutes § 49-36 provides in relevant part: “(a) No mechanic’s lien may attach to any building or its appurtenances, or to the land on which the same stands, or any lot, or any plot of land, in favor of any person, to *192 a greater amount in the whole than the price…”
Russo Roofing, Inc. v. Rottman, 863 A.2d 713 (Conn. App. Ct. 2005). · cites it 2× “2 General Statutes § 49-36 (a) provides: “No mechanic’s lien may attach to any building or its appurtenances, or to the land on which the same stands, or any lot, or any plot of land, in favor of any person, to a greater amount in the whole than the price which the owner agreed…”
O & G Indus., Inc. v. Am. Home Assurance Co., 204 Conn. App. 614 (Conn. App. Ct. 2021). · cites it 2× “30 owed to the plaintiff for the materials it furnished and because General Statutes § 49-36 ‘‘only permits such prepayment credit to property owners, not the general contrac- tor.”
Show all 21 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.