Mobilinx, a subcontractor, brought an ex parte motion seeking an order to declare Edge1 Equipment Rentals Inc.'s lien expired under section 45 of the Construction Act, arguing the lien was preserved out of time.
Mobilinx contended that the former Construction Lien Act (CLA) applied to the project because a procurement process commenced before July 1, 2018.
The court dismissed the motion without prejudice, emphasizing the high evidentiary burden for ex parte motions seeking a final order under section 45.
The evidence, based on a law clerk's affidavit relying on double hearsay from a website, was deemed insufficient and unreliable to prove the procurement commencement date or to clearly connect Edge1's lien to the specific improvement.
The decision highlighted the critical distinction in evidentiary requirements between interlocutory motions to vacate a lien under section 44 and final motions to declare a lien expired under section 45.
