Schmidt v. Santa Monica Commercial Co.
Before: Conrey
Synopsis
Street Law—Foreclosure of Liens—Bight of Assignee to Becover —Prima Facie Evidence.—In an action to foreclose liens for unpaid assessments for work done by plaintiff’s assignor in the due performance of an alleged contract for improvements on a public street pursuant to the provisions of the Vrooman Act, the introduction in evidence of the assessment-roll, the diagram and certificate of the city engineer, the affidavit of demand and nonpayment and the warrant signed by the street superintendent, is, in view of section 12 of the act, prima fame sufficient to prove the right of the plaintiff to recover.
Id.—Sufficiency of Findings.—Findings that all the allegations of the complaint are true, and all of the allegations of the answer opposed thereto are untrue, are sufficient, where there are no affirmative defenses contained in the answer.
Id.—Performance of Work Before Signing Contract—Exclusion of Proof Erroneous.—In an action for the foreclosure of liens for unpaid assessments for work done on a public street pursuant to the Vrooman Act, it is prejudicial error to refuse to permit the defendant to introduce evidence for the purpose of showing that the work was done before any contract was signed by the contractor. Id.—Failure to Appeal to Proper Board—Bight to Objection not Precluded.—The defendant is not estopped from making the objection that the contract was not signed in time because of Ms failure to appeal to the proper board within thirty days from the date of the warrant, since section 11 of the act does not apply to such a case.
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)