termination that a filing of a memorandum of the contract, embracing copies of substantially all topics required to be filed by statute, is sufficient." The California statute is now so worded also that a failure to file the contract, or plans and specifications, does not render the contract void, although such failure does prevent the owner from claiming that his liability to laborers and material-men is restricted to the contract price.18 In New Jersey a very different situation is found in that, under the New Jersey Laws, in the event that the contract is in writing and is filed, with the specifications, with the clerk of the county where the work is done, at or before the time when the building is begun, the liability of the owner is thereby limited to the contractor only, and does not extend to those performing services or labor or providing materials for the contractor.19 It should not be understood from this rule, however, that the subcontractor or material-man is helpless by reason thereof. It prevents him merely from enforcing a lien under the circumstances noted, but it does not prevent him securing a very definite degree of protection by the filing, under the New Jersey law, of what is 17 Blinn Lumber Co. V. Walker, 129 Cal. 62. 18 Bird v. Surety Co., 166 Pac. 1009. 19 English v. Warren, 65 N. J. Eq. 30; LaFoucherie V. Knutzen, 58 N. J. L. 234; Freedman v. Sandknop, 53 N. J. Eq. 243; Weaver v. Atl., etc., Co., 57 N. J. Eq. 547; Willets v. Earl, 53 N. J. L. 270; Budd v. Lucky, 28 N. J. L. 484; Ayres v. Revere, 25 N. J. L. 474; compare, Glading v. Frick, 88 Pa. St. 460. commonly known as a "Stop Notice," which is, in substance, a notice to the owner of his claim. The effect of this is to place the owner in a position where the payment by him of additional monies to the contractor will be at his peril, in view of the notice which he has received. As a practical matter this course will usually result in the owner's refusing to pay to the contractor such balance as may be due him and withholding it from him, subject to proper proof of the claims of those subcontractors from whom notices have been received. Formerly, in New Jersey, the filing of specifications or copies thereof with the contract was not required in every instance. It would appear, however,20 that this former rule dispensing with the filing of the specifications was limited largely to those cases where all the work was to be done, and the materials furnished, by the contractor, himself one of the parties to the agreement, and that, even formerly, the necessity existed of filing these specifications in the event that the contract referred to the specifications for the details of the work to be done, or was itself so incomplete that an examination of the specification became absolutely necessary for a proper understanding of the arrangements which had been made.2 21 The filing of the specifications or a duplicate or copy thereof, according to whether the original 20 LaFoucherie v. Knutzen, 58 N. J. L. 234, supra. 21 English v. Warren, 65 N. J. Eq. 30; Weaver v. Atl. Roofing Co., 57 N. J. Eq. 547. contract or a duplicate or copy thereof is filed, is, under the present New Jersey statutes, however, mandatory if the owner is to be protected.22 § 113. Priority of Claims.-In concluding the present discussion of mechanics' liens it should be again noted, and remembered always, that in every instance the only safe course to follow is to refer directly to the statutes of the particular State in which it is desired to enforce the lien. Only in this way can a definite and adequate understanding be reached of what rule is to be applied under the special circumstances existing; only so can the various elements of the extent and time of accrual of the lien, the property affected thereby, and the rights of priority of respective lienors, be properly determined. Thus, in New York, the lien law gives to those who have performed labor and furnished materials, priority over the general creditors of an insolvent owner or contractor, and provides for the priority of day laborers over contractors and subcontractors, irrespective of when their liens are filed, and likewise of a material-man over such contractors or subcontractors.23 In New York, too, laborers and material-men are given priority, among themselves, according to the date of the filing of their respective liens. The priority of lienors in other jurisdictions 22 English v. Warren, 65 N. J. Eq. 30, supra. 23 See Herman et al. v. City of New York, 130 N. Y. A. D. 531; Hedden Const. Co. v. Proctor, etc., Co., 62 Misc. (N. will naturally vary, to a greater or less extent, in accordance with the peculiar doctrines or conditions which there exist. It will not be amiss to emphasize again the fact that, in all instances, the decisions on the various phases of the lien law are based upon the special provisions of the particular statutes involved, and that only by a careful examination of the statutes in force, when and where a case arises, can the exact rights of the parties be properly weighed and determined. |