Following the market crash in 2008-09, the $2.8 billion Fontainebleau development in Las Vegas was halted with 70 percent of the construction completed. Naturally, numerous mechanic’s liens were filed by contractors, subcontractors, professionals and suppliers (“claimants”). In the bankruptcy proceeding, the lenders asserted novel and potentially legally destabilizing theories against the claimants’ rights: a) the lenders were “equitably subrogated” to the priority of the original preconstruction lender, and b) the subordination agreements signed by the claimants waived their statutory rights. Upon certification of three questions to the Nevada Supreme Court by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court, the Supreme Court recently rejected the two theories and confirmed the following: a) the doctrine of equitable subrogation does not apply against mechanic’s lien claimants, and a mortgage incurred after the commencement of work on a project will not substitute for the senior priority position of a preexisting lien satisfied by the mortgagee if intervening mechanic’s liens exist, and b) contractual subordination agreements signed by claimants purporting to subordinate mechanic’s liens in advance are not enforceable, but claimants may waive their statutory rights when the precise requirements of the statutes are met.