In August of 2024, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi issued a decision relating the application of the Mississippi Lien Law, 85-7-401, et seq. where a surety bond has been furnished to stand in the place of the lien as permitted pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. §87-7-415 and the subsequent filing of a Payment Action. In Graybar Electric Co. v. O’Neal Constructors, LLC, Plaintiff Grabar Electric Co. (“Graybar”) was a subcontractor to Defendant O’Neal Constructors, LLC  (“O’Neil”) on a project for Calgon Carbon Corporation (“Calgon”).  When O’Neal failed to pay Graybar, it filed a lien on Calgon’s property.  O’Neil secured a bond from Liberty Mutual to have the lien released pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. §85-7-415.  Graybar subsequently filed suit against Calgon, O’Neal and Liberty Mutual but did not file a notice of lis pendens with the commencement of the Payment Action as required under Miss. Code Ann. §85-7-405(1)(c)(i). Liberty Mutual then filed a motion to dismiss arguing that there could be no valid lien unless there was a filing of a notice of lis pendens at the time the Payment Action was filed with the Court.  Plaintiff maintained that the bond discharged and replaced the bond.  The district court disagreed and found that the intent of the bond is to remove the lien from the property and have it instead attach to the bond.  It does not eliminate the requirement for the filing of a Payment Action and therefore the filing of the notice of lis pendens with the commencement of that Payment Action.  The district court therefore found that because this procedural requirement had not been followed, the lien was discharged and likewise the bond.