Mechanics’ Lien Affidavit Requirement Gets Some Flexibility Under Pennsylvania Law

Nolan M. Finnerty, Esq.

A recent decision by the Pennsylvania Superior Court in Clark Property Maintenance, LLC v. Peak Real Estate Solutions, LLC sheds light on what constitutes a valid “affidavit of service” under the Mechanics’ Lien Law. In short, the Court said that a timely filed sheriff’s return of service can satisfy the law’s affidavit requirement, as long as it clearly shows the property owner received notice of the lien.

Notably, the Superior Court’s analysis in Clark Property Maintenance, LLC v. Peak Real Estate Solutions, LLC  frequently cites a Pennsylvania Supreme Court case, Terra Firma Builders, LLC v. King, 249 A.3d 976 (Pa. 2021), to illustrate both the “strict construction” principle that typically applies to Mechanics’ Lien Law and the possibility of recognizing “substantial compliance” in certain instances (Terra Firma was argued before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court by David Makara of our firm, Davis Bucco & Makara).

Overview of the Dispute

Clark Property Maintenance (“Clark”) was hired to work on Peak Real Estate Solutions’ property, but Clark was not paid in full, so they filed a mechanics’ lien against the property claiming nearly $70,000. Instead of filing a standard sworn affidavit to prove service on the property owner, Clark relied on a sheriff’s return of service (the sheriff’s official documentation that the lien was served). When the trial court struck the lien for lacking a formal affidavit, Clark appealed, and the Superior Court reversed that decision, concluding that Pennsylvania law permits a sheriff’s return to fulfill the same purpose as an affidavit of service if it’s filed on time and shows the owner received notice.

Why This Matters for Mechanics’ Lien Litigation in Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania’s Mechanics’ Lien Law requires two key showings in order to perfect a lien: (1) serve notice of the lien on the property owner, and (2) file proof of that service (i.e., an “affidavit of service”) in court, within 20 days. If you miss a step—or fail to meet the strict deadlines—the lien can be struck as unperfected.

In Clark, the Superior Court emphasized that the critical point is ensuring the property owner has actual notice of the lien. A sheriff’s return of service is an official record stating that proper notice was indeed delivered. Although the law calls it an “affidavit,” the Court said the sheriff’s return satisfies the same purpose—and might even carry more weight than a self-prepared affidavit.

A Note on “Strict Construction” vs. “Substantial Compliance”

Courts often remind us that the Mechanics’ Lien Law is in “derogation of the common law,” meaning it didn’t exist at common law and must be followed precisely. Yet, Pennsylvania case law also recognizes that if the property owner truly received notice, courts will focus on the substance over the form. The Superior Court’s ruling in Clark underscores that principle.

Mechanics’ Lien Tips for Contractors and Subcontractors

• Don’t Skip the Basics
  You must still serve the lien on the property owner and file proof of that service in a timely manner. Merely filing the lien itself is not enough—you have to provide notice, then show the court you did so.
• Sheriff’s Service Can Be Your Friend
  A sheriff’s return can serve as valid proof of service, but don’t assume that it automatically covers every detail. Make sure the return is filed on time and clearly identifies what was served, on whom, and when.
• Watch the Clock
  The 20-day window (from the date of filing the lien) to file your proof of service is strict. Even if you use the sheriff’s office, follow up to ensure the return gets filed before the deadline runs.
• When in Doubt, File an Affidavit Anyway
  Although Clark confirms a sheriff’s return works, there’s no harm in adding a straightforward affidavit of service if it’s feasible. Belt-and-suspenders is often the safest approach in lien practice.
• Consult Counsel Early
  Mistakes in mechanics’ lien procedure can be fatal to your claim. Two of the most common reasons mechanics’ lien claims fail are because of issues with timing and proper documentation. It is best to talk to a lawyer who’s familiar with Pennsylvania construction law to ensure all requirements are met.

Bottom Line

The Clark decision reinforces that courts will look for actual notice under the Pennsylvania Mechanics’ Lien Law, rather than dismissing a lien because of technicalities in how the notice was filed. That said, the strict deadlines remain in place, and serving timely notice is non-negotiable. Anyone filing a mechanics’ lien should stay vigilant about deadlines, procedure, and proof of service—whether it’s an affidavit or a sheriff’s return.

Author:

Nolan M. Finnerty, Esq. is an Attorney at Davis Bucco & Makara, where he delivers strategic and comprehensive legal representation to construction industry professionals, including landowners, property developers, general contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers. He guides clients through every stage of the construction process, from project planning and zoning compliance to contract drafting, bid disputes, and construction litigation.

Understanding your rights and options under Pennsylvania construction laws requires professional guidance. Our office has a demonstrated track record for achieving successful outcomes for our clients when they matter most. Contact Davis Bucco & Makara to ensure your business adequately addresses legal risks to its continued operations.