Barrows v. Wm. Simpson Construction Co.

PRESTON (H. L.), J.,

pro

tem.

This is an appeal by the defendants, The Wm. Simpson Construction Company, a corporation, and Guaranty Building & Loan Association, a corporation, from a judgment entered against them in the sum of $1120 in an action for damages.

In the month of November, 1923, plaintiffs and respondents herein were occupying a building in Hollywood, California, used by them for the display and sale of Chrysler automobiles; that, as found by the trial court, “for some days prior to November 13, 1923, the defendants negligently and without use of ordinary care or skill, and without taking reasonable precautions to sustain the land occupied by the plaintiffs, excavated the land adjoining on the west to the said lands and buildings so occupied by the plaintiffs, and excavated and removed the earth therefrom to a depth in excess of twenty feet, without leaving sufficient support for the land and building so occupied by the plaintiffs, and by reason thereof, and by its own natural weight, a great part of the land so occupied by plaintiffs sank and gave way, and by reason thereof, the walls and foundation of the said building on said land so possessed by plaintiffs were undermined, and by reason thereof, the westerly wall of plaintiffs’ said building, and the westerly half of the floor thereof, bulged, buckled and broke, and plaintiffs were thereby deprived of the occupancy and use of the west one-half of said building so possessed by them for a period of four months from November 13, 1923.”

Plaintiffs were occupying said land and building under a sublease from Paul G. Hoffman Company and paying $560 per month therefor, and because of their said loss of the use of the west half of the premises for four months, -they claimed damages in the sum of $5,000, and were awarded by the court, sitting without a jury, damages in the said sum of $1120.

Appellants first contend that no damages were proved. This contention is based upon the following facts: The property in question was leased by the former owner to Paul G. Hoffman Company, who in turn

subleased

the premises to plaintiffs. After these leases had been made,

[257]