Hudson Building Supply Co. v. Stulman

Hammond, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court. Judge MacDaniel determined the credibility of various witnesses and, weighing their testimony, decided that Hudson Building Supply Company, Inc., the appellant, was estopped to claim the mechanics’ lien on the property of Stulman, appellee, it had sought below to perfect. He said in an opinion filed on August 6,1969 : “The Court feels that all of the elements and facts of an equitable estoppel are present in this particular case and that Hudson is estopped because of its actions of enforcing a Mechanics’ Lien against Stulman. “* * * The attorneys for Stulman are hereby directed to draw the necessary Order to carry out the terms of this opinion and to present it to the Court for signature.” Hudson filed an appeal two days later. On August 15, a week later, a copy of the proposed decree was sent Judge MacDaniel by counsel for Stulman and a copy of the forwarding letter and of the proposed decree was sent to Hudson’s counsel.

On August 18, 1969, Judge MacDaniel ³⁰⁶ signed the proposed decree dismissing the bill to enforce the mechanics’ lien. The docket entries printed in appellant’s record extract end with these two items: “August 6, 1969 — Memorandum and Opinion filed. (Hon. H. Kemp MacDaniel). “August 8, 1969 — Mr. Clerk: Enter an Appeal to the Court of Appeals on behalf of Hudson Building Supply Company, Inc., Plaintiff, from the judgment entered in this action on August 4, 1969, by J. M. Dryden Hall, Atty. for Plaintiff, with certificate of mailing, fd.” The docket entries in the transcript go on to recite: “8-18-69 Order of Court fd.” “9-2-69 Motion & Order extending time for transmission of Kecord on Appeal, fd.” We were told at the argument and it is fully apparent that no final judgment had been entered when the appeal was filed on August 8, 1969.

Such a judgment was not entered until ten days later and no appeal was