Robinson & Wilson, Inc. v. Stone

Good Law
110 Cal. Rptr. 675·35 Cal. App. 3d 396
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 16, 1973Civ. 12359California6,778 words

Opinion

Opinion

Tamura, J.

This litigation arises out of a dispute over the interpretation of a contract for the construction of a medical building. Plaintiffs (general contractors) brought two actions against defendants (five medical doctors); one to foreclose a mechanic’s lien and the other for damages for breach of contract. Defendants cross-complained against plaintiffs and their surety on the performance and materialman’s bond for damages for alleged breaches by plaintiffs. Following a month-long, consolidated, nonjury trial, the court found for defendants and judgment was entered that plaintiffs take nothing on their complaint and that defendants recover from plaintiffs and their surety $36,382 plus costs on the cross-complaint. Plaintiffs appeal from the judgment and defendants cross-appeal from an order denying their motion to amend their cross-complaint to include an allegation and prayer for recovery of attorneys’ fees.

The basic facts necessary to an understanding of the issues presented by this appeal may be summarized as follows:

The project was initially conceived by a real estate broker (Carl Davis) and several others. Defendants later acquired the property to be developed,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.