Bricklayers of Western Pennsylvania Combined Funds, Inc. v. Scott's Development Co.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Dissent
DISSENTING OPINION BY
OLSON, J.:
The learned majority has concluded that the unions are “subcontractors” under the Mechanics’ Lien Law (“MLL”), as the unions “furnished labor” to the contractor under implied contracts. Based on this conclusion, the majority holds that the trustees of employee benefit funds (the “Trustees” or “Appellants”) have standing to assert mechanics’ lien claims — on behalf of the union members — for unpaid contributions to the funds. I must, respectfully, disagree with the majority’s analysis and conclusion in this case. Initially, on appeal, Appellants did not argue…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- United States Ex Rel. Sherman v. Carter Constr. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1957
- YOUNG v. KayeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
- Wyatt Inc. v. CITIZENS BANK OF PASuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
- Rabatin v. Allied Glove Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
- Hawaii Carpenters' Trust Funds v. Aloe Development Corp.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1981
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.