Parker v. Savage Placer Mining Co.
Synopsis
Mechanics’ Liens—Variance.—In an action by several plaintiffs to foreclose mechanics’ liens, the complaint, in each count, alleged that the plaintiff therein named performed labor at the special instance and request of the defendant, and that the defendant agreed to pay therefor, etc. From the evidence it appeared that the defendant employed one H. to run a tunnel in its mine at a stipulated price, and H. employed the plaintiffs to perform the work upon the tunnel at a stipulated sum per day. H. failed to pay them for their work, and thereupon they filed their liens. Judgment passed in their favor.
Held: There was no error in the proceedings. The complaints in each case (as stated in the syllabus) alleged that the work was done at the request of the defendant, and that the defendant agreed to pay, etc.
The Court: In this case the Court below'gave judgment in favor of the plaintiffs for certain claims made by them under the Mechanics’ Lien law. It appears from the evidence in the case that the defendant employed one John Hurley to run a tunnel in its mine, at a stipulated price, and Hurley employed the plaintiffs to perform the work upon the tunnel, at a stipulated price per day. Hurley failed to pay them for such work, and they thereupon filed their liens for the same. Judgment passed in their favor, and we find no error in the proceedings.
Judgment and order affirmed.
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)