Santa Cruz Rock Pavement Co. v. Lyons

Harrison, J. The plaintiff seeks by this action to enforce a mechanic’s lien on certain real property in San Francisco belonging to the defendant, Ellen Lyons, for work done by it in the improvement of the street in front of said property. The defendant, Ellen, is the wife of her codefendant, James M. Lyons, and the land is her [213]separate property. The work done by the plaintiff was performed under a written contract, entered into between it and the defendant James, and, after its completion, the plaintiff filed a claim of lien with the county recorder, which it now seeks to enforce against the property.

Section 1191 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides: “Any person who, at the request of the reputed owner of any lot in any incorporated city or town, grades, fills in, or otherwise improves the same, or the street or sidewalk in front of or adjoining the same, or constructs any areas or vaults or cellars or rooms under said sidewalk, or makes any improvements in connection therewith, has a lien upon such lot for his work done and materials furnished.”

Much of the argument herein has been directed to the question whether it appears, from the record, that the defendant James was the “reputed owner” of the land in question, but, in the view taken by us of the foregoing se.ction, it is unnecessary to decide this question.

The owner of real property may, by his acts or conduct, be estopped from questioning the acts of a reputed owner of such property, and may thereby be bound by the acts of such reputed owner; but, in the absence of the elements of an estoppel, he will not be bound by the unauthorized acts of one who is merely reputed to be the owner of the land. He cannot be deprived of his title to the land, nor can a lien be imposed thereon, against his will, by virtue of any agreement or contract on the part of one who is merely reputed to be the owner of such land, unless he has in some way held such person out as the reputed owner, with authority to do the act, or make the agreement by which it is sought to create the lien. It is no more within the constitutional power of the legislature to authorize a reputed owner of a lot or parcel of land to create a lien thereon, against the will of the real owner, than it would be to authorize such reputed owner to transfer the title to said [214]