Dated Invoices Are Not Enough: Mississippi Supreme Court Clarifies Construction Lien Requirements For Contractors

On October 15, 2026, the Mississippi Supreme Court issued an important decision clarifying the information required to establish an enforceable construction lien under Mississippi law. In Cuevas Machine Company, Inc. v. Calgon Carbon Corporation, No. 2026-FC-00451-SCT (Miss. Oct. 15, 2026), the Court held that simply attaching dated invoices to a construction lien does not satisfy the statutory requirement to specify the last date work was performed when the invoices do not clearly identify what those dates represent.

As previously discussed on this blog, Mississippi Code Section 85-7-405(1)(b) requires a contractor to file a construction lien within ninety days after the last work performed or labor, services, or materials provided. The statute further requires that the lien “specify the date the claim was due,” which the statute equates with the last date labor, services, or materials were supplied to the project.

In Cuevas, a subcontractor filed two construction liens totaling approximately $1.23 million for unpaid fabrication and machining services. Although the liens did not expressly identify the last date work was performed, the subcontractor attached dated invoices describing the work and amounts owed.

In the subcontractor’s underlying lawsuit to enforce the lien, the owner filed a motion to dismiss claiming that the lien failed to comply with the statutory requirements to “specify the date the claim was due, which is the same as the last date the labor, services, or materials were supplied.” Cuevas argued the attached invoices satisfied the statutory requirement. The United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi concluded that the invoices did not satisfy the statutory requirements because they failed to explain what the dates represented. Cuevas appealed.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit certified the following question to the Mississippi Supreme Court:

If a lienor attaches dated invoices to a construction lien, but these invoices do not plainly indicate the “the last date the labor, services or materials were supplied to the premises,” do the attachments nonetheless satisfy the requirement that an enforceable lien “specify the date the claim was due” under Mississippi Code Section 85-7-405(1)(b)?

The Mississippi Supreme Court answered no.

While the text of Section 85-7-405(1)(b) permits a lien to comply “in substance” with the statutory form language, this flexibility does not eliminate the express requirement to identify the date the claim was due. The date is particularly important because it establishes the starting point for determining whether the lien was filed within the statutory ninety-day period. Without a clearly identified date, the property owner cannot readily determine whether the lien was timely filed.

The Mississippi Supreme Court emphasized: “Simply including a dated attachment such as an invoice, with no explanation as to what the date represents is insufficient under Section 85-7-405(1)(b).” Cuevas, slip op. at 17, ¶ 29.

Importantly, the Court distinguished between a dispute concerning the accuracy of a date expressly identified in a lien and a lien’s failure to identify the required date at all. Although an evidentiary hearing may resolve the former, it cannot remedy the latter deficiency in the originally-filed lien. The Court also did not decide whether an attachment that clearly identifies the required date, rather than the lien itself, would satisfy the statute.

The practical takeaway is straightforward:

Contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers seeking to preserve construction lien rights in Mississippi should expressly identify the last date labor, services, or materials were supplied to the project, preferably on the face of the lien itself. They should not rely on invoice dates, payment applications, or other attachments that require an owner or court to infer when work was last performed.

For property owners, the Cuevas decision reinforces the importance of carefully reviewing construction liens for statutory compliance. Owners should likewise scrutinize whether the lien expressly identifies the last date labor, services, or materials were supplied to the property and evaluate whether the lien was timely filed. Where a lien fails to specify the required date, or relies solely on ambiguous invoice dates, the owner may have grounds to challenge its enforceability.

As Cuevas illustrates, even a lien securing a substantial alleged debt may be deficient if the claimant fails to comply with Mississippi’s statutory requirements.