Reliable Constructors v. CFJ Properties

Present: 	All the Justices
RELIABLE CONSTRUCTORS, INC.
OPINION BY JUSTICE LEROY R. HASSELL, SR.
v. 	Record No. 010535 	March 1, 2002
CFJ PROPERTIES, ET AL.
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF CAROLINE COUNTY
Horace A. Revercomb, III, Judge
In this appeal, we consider whether the circuit court
erred by invalidating a mechanic's lien without permitting the
lien claimant to present evidence that its inclusion of a fine
in the mechanic's lien memorandum was an error.
Reliable Constructors, Inc., a subcontractor, supplied
labor and materials for plumbing and mechanical work
associated with construction of a project located in Ruther
Glen, Virginia. 	The Oakmont Corporation was the general
contractor for the project, a travel plaza. 	CFJ Properties is
the owner of the real estate upon which the project was
constructed. 	Flying J, Inc., is CFJ's purported agent.
Wanda P. Souther, Reliable Constructors' corporate
secretary, signed a memorandum of mechanic's lien affidavit
that "CFJ Properties, Flying J Inc. is justly indebted to
[Reliable Constructors] in the sum of $330,846.02, for the
consideration stated in the foregoing memorandum [for

mechanic's lien claimed by subcontractor]."1 Included within
the sum of $330,846.02 was an item identified as "PCO-30 VOSH
Department – Fine to RCI Handwash [-] $250.00." 	Reliable
Constructors admitted, in response to a request for admission,
that its claim for $250.00 represented reimbursement for a
fine that had been levied by the Virginia Department of Labor
and Industry's Occupational Safety and Health Enforcement
Division. 	Reliable Constructors failed to provide "hand wash"
facilities on site for its employees.
Reliable Constructors filed its bill of complaint to
enforce the mechanic's lien against the Oakmont Corporation,
CFJ Properties, and Flying J, Inc. 	The defendants filed
responsive pleadings and a motion to dismiss. 	They alleged in
their motion to dismiss that the mechanic's lien was invalid
and, therefore, unenforceable because the mechanic's lien
memorandum included a sum due for labor or materials furnished
more than 150 days prior to the last day on which labor was
performed or material was furnished to the job preceding the
filing of that memorandum in violation of Code § 43-4.
Specifically, the defendants alleged that "that portion of the
claim consisting of [the fine] was for labor supplied 212 days
1 The "foregoing memorandum" stated that the $330,846.02
was for "[l]abor and materials furnished for plumbing and
mechanical work associated with the construction of The Flying
J Travel Plaza." 	(Emphasis added).
2

prior to the last day on which Reliable supplied labor to the
job."
The circuit court considered pleadings, exhibits,
memoranda submitted by counsel, and argument. 	The court
agreed with the defendants and entered a final order that
dismissed Reliable Constructors' bill of complaint to enforce
the mechanic's lien. 	Reliable Constructors appeals.
Reliable Constructors asserts in an assignment of error
that the circuit court "erred in ruling without hearing
evidence on the nature, timing, and details of the
administrative fine" levied by the Department of Labor and
Industry. 	Continuing, Reliable Constructors says that it
committed an error by including the fine in its mechanic's
lien memorandum and that pursuant to Code § 43-15, the circuit
court should not have invalidated the lien. 	The defendants do
not respond to Reliable Constructors' statutory argument.
Code § 43-15 states:
"No inaccuracy in the memorandum filed, or in
the description of the property to be covered by the
lien, shall invalidate the lien, if the property can
be reasonably identified by the description given
and the memorandum conforms substantially to the
requirements of §§ 43-5, 43-8 and 43-10,
respectively, and is not wilfully false."
We agree with Reliable Constructors that it was entitled to
present evidence to establish that its inclusion of the fine
constitutes an inaccuracy within the meaning of Code § 43-15
3

and that the circuit court should not have invalidated the
lien on that basis.2 The word "inaccuracy" is defined as: "the
condition of being inaccurate." 	Webster's Third New
International Dictionary 1139 (1986). 	The word "inaccurate"
is defined as: 	"not accurate: 	as . . . containing a mistake
or error: 	incorrect, erroneous." 	Id. 	We hold that the
circuit court should have permitted Reliable Constructors to
present evidence to establish that its inclusion of the fine
constituted an inaccuracy and that the inaccuracy was not
willfully false.
Accordingly, we will reverse the judgment of the circuit
court and remand this case for further proceedings.
Reversed and remanded.
2 In this appeal, there is no contention that Reliable
Constructors failed to comply with Code §§ 43-5, -8, and -10
which govern the sufficiency of the mechanic's lien
memorandum, affidavit, and notice.
4