Skip to main content
Alerts & ArticlesConstructionResources

Mechanic’s Lien Interests in Minnesota

  1. WORK. The furnishing of labor, skill, material or machinery “. . . for the erection, alteration, repair, or removal of any building, fixture, bridge, wharf, fence, or other structure thereon, or for grading, filling in, or excavating the same, or for clearing, grubbing, or first breaking, or for furnishing and placing soil or sod, or for furnishing and planting of trees, shrubs, or plant materials, or for labor performed in placing soil or sod, or for labor performed in planting trees, shrubs, or plant materials, or for digging or repairing any ditch, drain, well, fountain, cistern, reservoir, or vault thereon, or for laying, altering or repairing any sidewalk, curb, gutter, paving, sewer, pipe, or conduit in or upon the same, or in or upon the adjoining half of any highway, street, or alley upon which the same abuts.[1]”
  2. IMPROVEMENT. The Work must be for an improvement to real property[2]. The work must be a capital improvement to better the real estate as opposed to repairs or maintenance which are not lienable[3]. The improvement can be new construction or remodeling of existing construction[4]. The improvement must be integral to and incorporated into the structures erected on real property[5] but need not be visible[6].
  3. TYPES PERMITTED. The following types of labor, skill, material or machinery work has been permitted as lienable:
    1. Architects[7];
    2. Contractors and Subcontractors[8];
    3. Engineers[9];
    4. Laborers[10];
    5. Land Survyors[11];
    6. Superintendants[12];
    7. Suppliers[13];
  4. TYPES NOT PERMITTED. The following types of labor, skill, material or machinery work has been disallowed as lienable for mechanic’s lien purposes:
    1. Attorneys[14];
    2. Interest in excess of judgment rate[15];
    3. Repair parts[16];
    4. Material suppliers below first tier where one material supplier supplied to another material supplier[17];
    5. Surety bond premiums[18];
    6. Services relating to obtaining financing, zoning, variances and coordinating leasing[19];
    7. Tenant trade fixtures[20];
    8. Test drilling for minerals[21];
    9. Unions and its benefits funds[22];
    10. Unlicensed residential contractors[23];
    11. Unperformed or the portion of uncompleted work[24];
    12. Unregistered foreign corporation or other entity required to be registered in Minnesota at the time of the lien foreclosure action[25];
  5. TYPES QUESTIONABLE. The following types of labor, skill, material or machinery work has been questioned by the courts as to whether or not it is lienable for mechanic’s lien purposes:
    1. Pricing, material selection and estimating services[26]

Terms of Use for this Summary Guide

This information is being provided as general educational materials byAlden Pearson, P.A. It is not specific legal advice to you and does not create an attorney-client relationship. We encourage you to obtain competent legal advice from an attorney in determining how you will be affected by Minnesotalien laws.

[1] Minn. Stat. § 514.01.

[2] Minn. Stat. § 514.01.

[3] Kloster-Madsen, Inc. v. Tafi’s, Inc., 226 N.W.2d 603, 607 (Minn. 1975).

[4] Taney v. Independent Sch. Dist. No. 624, 673 N.W.2d 497, 504 (Minn.Ct.App. 2004).

[5] Taney v. Independent Sch. Dist. No. 624, 673 N.W.2d 497, 504 (Minn.Ct.App. 2004).

[6] Kirkwold Constr. Co. v. M.G.A. Constr., Inc., 513 N.W.2d 349 (Minn. 1995).

[7] Kirkwold Constr. Co. v. M.G.A. Constr., Inc., 513 N.W.2d 241 (Minn. 1994).

[8] Minn. Stat. § 514.01.

[9] Kirkwold Constr. Co. v. M.G.A. Constr., Inc., 513 N.W.2d 241 (Minn. 1994).

[10] Combs v. Jackson, 72 N.W. 565 (Minn. 1897).

[11] Minn. Stat. § 514.01.

[12] State v. Service Elec. & Supply, Inc., 316 N.W.2d 390 (Wis. 1982).

[13] Dunham Assocs., Inc. v. Group Inv., Inc., 223 N.W.2d 376 (1974).

[14] London Constr. Co. v. Roseville Townhomes, Inc., 473 N.W.2d 917, 919-920 (Minn.Ct.App. 1991).

[15] Minn. Stat. § 514.135.

[16] Johnson v. Starett, 149 N.W. 6 (Minn. 1914).

[17]Minn. Stat. §514.01 (2009).

[18] Baxter Sash & Door Co. v. Ornes, 153 N.W. 594, 596 (Minn. 1915).

[19] Phillips-Klein Cos., Inc. v.Tiffany Partnership, 474 N.W.2d 370 (Minn.Ct.App. 1991).

[20] Johnson v. Grady, 244 N.W. 409 (Minn. 1932).

[21] Colvin v. Weiner, 65 N.W. 1079 (Minn. 1896).

[22] United States ex rel United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners v. Woerfel Corp., 545 F.2d 1148 (8th Cir. 1976); Twin City Pipe Trades Servs. Ass’n, Inc. v. Peak Mech., Inc., 689 N.W.2d 549 (Minn.Ct.App. 2004).

[23] Minn. Stat. § 326.92, Subd. 2.

[24] Zobel v. Dahl Constr. V. Crotty, 356 N.W.2d 42 (Minn. 1984).

[25] Minn. Stat. §303.20 (2009).

[26] Phenix Mfg., Inc. v. Stang Concrete Co., Inc., 1999 WL 308625 (Minn.Ct.App. 1999) (unpublished).