Diaz Construction v. The Industrial Development Board of The Metropolitan Government of Nashville And Davidson County, et al.

Case Number
M2014-00696-COA-R3-CV

A subcontractor filed suit to enforce a mechanic’s lien. The subcontractor, which was also a remote contractor, was required by Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-11-145(a) to serve a notice of its claim of nonpayment on the owner of the project as well as on the “prime contractor in contractual privity with the remote contractor.” The subcontractor notified the owner, but it did not notify the prime contractor. The subcontractor asserted it was not required to notify the prime contractor because it had no contractual relationship with the prime contractor. The defendants moved to dismiss the subcontractor’s complaint due to its failure to comply with the statute and notify the proper parties. The trial court granted the motions and dismissed the subcontractor’s lien claims. The subcontractor appealed, and we affirm the trial court’s judgment. The subcontractor is required by statute to notify both the owner and the prime contractor of the project of nonpayment.

Authoring Judge
Judge Andy D. Bennett
Originating Judge
Chancellor Carol L. McCoy
Case Name
Diaz Construction v. The Industrial Development Board of The Metropolitan Government of Nashville And Davidson County, et al.
Date Filed
Dissent or Concur
No
Download PDF Version