Doggett v. Bellows
California Supreme Court Mar 24, 1885 No. No. 8714Published
Synopsis
Mechanic’s Lien.—In an Action for the Foreclosure of a Mechanic’s Lien, the complaint should aver the amount due under the contract to the contractor from the owner of the building on which the work was done.
By the COURT. Action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien. There is no averment in the complaint that any sum was due from the Mendocino Flume & Mining Company, the owner, to Bellows the contractor; therefore the demurrer of the company to the complaint should have been sustained: Latson v. Nelson, 11 Pac. C. L. J. 589; Whittier v. Hollister, 64 Cal. 283, 30 Pac. 846.
The judgment, so far as it concerns the Mendocino Flume & Mining Company, is reversed, and the cause is remanded with directions to sustain the demurrer above referred to.
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)