Troup Enterprises v. Mitchell, Carrington & Rayfield, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1ConcurrenceAndrews, Judge
While I concur with the result reached, and all that is said in Division 2,1 do not agree with all that is said in Division 1, because I believe the opinion leaves the implication that whether or not the last work performed was “substantial” is a factor to consider in whether or not the work is “complete.”
OCGA § 44-14-361.1 (a) (1) & (2) provide that, in order for a subcontractor such as MCR to enforce a lien against the owner’s property, (1) there must be a “substantial compliance by the party claiming the lien with his contract for building, repairing, or improving; . . . .” and (2) the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Superior Rigging & Erecting Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1969
- Yates Paving & Grading Co. v. WatersCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1987