Duitman v. Liebelt

The crucial question on this appeal is whether plaintiff Duitman was a principal contractor or a subcontractor at the time he furnished the materials and performed the labor which are embraced in his claim for mechanic’s lien. If Duitman supplied labor and materials while a subcontractor, his claim for a lien was fatally de fective for failure to give the new owners of record, defendants Fox, the notice required by sec. 289.02 (1), Stats. 1957, 1 within sixty days of furnishing the first labor and materials.

The circuit court determined that Duitman was a subcontractor at the time he furnished…