Alex, your summary of the GHB v. Guin and Bank of West Alabama is misplaced.

It was undisputed that GHB began working and providing materials (commencement of work) before any funds were released by the bank. What the issue was, as it was an issue of first impression in Alabama, whether a non-obligatory note secured by a mortgage has priority over a mechanics/materialman's lien when the work/materials commenced prior to the first release of funds. In this case, the note did not require the bank to release funds but if it did, the mortgage which was filed before the commencement of work, was there to secure the funds. Many states hold that a non-obligatory loan secured by a mortgage does not have priority over a M/M lien when the work/materials commenced prior to the advancement of funds even when the mortgage was filed first. I argued the same argument for GHB and the Supreme Court held 8-1 in my favor until several non-parties that had clout filed an amicus brief after the decision for the Court to reconsider. It's funny, after they filed the brief and the Supreme Court considered it (over my objections since they filed the brief late in my opinion), it completely reversed itself. All the same judges that ruled in favor of my client first (8 out of 9 judges) ruled against my client. I hope this clears up the summary. Thanks, Jud Allen.