Sections 1311.01 to 1311.22 of the Revised Code are to be construed liberally to secure the beneficial results, intents, and purposes thereof; and a substantial compliance with those sections is sufficient for the validity of the liens under those sections, provided for and to give jurisdiction to the court to enforce the same.
Hoppes Builders & Dev. Co. v. Hurren Builders, Inc., 692 N.E.2d 622 (Ohio Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 9ד1 Erb maintains that the mechanic’s lien statutes should be liberally construed pursuant to R.C. 1311.22 and that case law to the contrary is superseded by the statute.”
SRS Distrib., Inc. v. Axis All., L.L.C., 2020 Ohio 1529 (Ohio Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 4ד22 of the Revised Code are to be construed liberally to secure the beneficial results, intents, and purposes thereof; and a substantial compliance with those sections is sufficient for -11- the validity of the liens under those sections, provided for and to give jurisdiction to…”
Crock Constr. Co. v. Stanley Miller Constr. Co., 66 Ohio St. 3d 588 (Ohio 1993). · cites it 2דWe proceed to the specific issue to be determined, which is: What is the consequence of a failure to itemize? In concluding that a failure to itemize was not fatal to appellees’ cause of action based on the mechanic’s lien, the court of appeals determined that R.”
Zara Constr., Inc. v. Belcastro, 2022 Ohio 788 (Ohio Ct. App. 2022). “The affidavit was signed by appellant's president on February 10, 2012, and was filed on February 17, 2012, yet the dates when the work was first and last performed were set forth as May 6, 2012 and December 15, 2012. Clearly, the work could not have been performed and completed…”
Paris Hill Ltd. P'ship v. Erb Lumber, Inc., 726 N.E.2d 1013 (Ohio Ct. App. 1998). “Erb further asserts that mechanic’s lien laws should be liberally construed so as to secure the beneficial results, intents, and purposes of the laws, pursuant to R.C. 1311.22. Erb also argues a distinction between lien laws *4 relating to the preservation of lien rights, which…”
Crock Constr. Co. v. Stanley Miller Constr. Co., 1993 Ohio 212 (Ohio 1993). · cites it 2דWe proceed to the specific issue to be determined, which is: What is the consequence of a failure to itemize? In concluding that a failure to itemize was not fatal to appellees' cause of action based on the mechanic's lien, the court of appeals determined that R.”
In re Rickert, 156 B.R. 200 (Bankr. S.D. Ohio 1993). · cites it 2דSupply such a result is consistent with Ohio Rev.Code § 1311.22 which provides that: Section 1311.”
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.