Barbera

Barbera v. Sokol

Good Law
101 Cal. App. 3d 725·161 Cal. Rptr. 843·1980 Cal. App. LEXIS 1435
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 1, 1980Civ. 55623California3,189 words

Opinion

Opinion

Jefferson, J.

This is an action by a masonry subcontractor against an owner-builder and general contractor for damages and attorney fees flowing from a breach of a written construction contract. By second amended complaint, plaintiff masonry subcontractor Joseph Barbera, doing business as A. M. Barbera & Son, also alleged causes of action on theories of an open book account and quantum meruit. Plaintiff also sought, as additional relief, foreclosure of a mechanic’s lien and recovery on a bond. Named as defendants were Erwin H. Sokol, individually and doing business as E. H. Sokol Construction Company, Arthur and Frances Sokol, Continental Auxiliary Company, a California corporation, and Bank of America National Trust & Savings Association. As a fifth cause of action, plaintiff sought recovery on performance bonds executed by defendant Houston General Insurance Company.

The defendants answered the second amended complaint, denying liability. Defendants Erwin H. Sokol, individually and doing business as E. H. Sokol Construction Company, and Arthur and Frances Sokol filed a cross-complaint against plaintiff for damages for breach of the same construction contract by plaintiff and for…

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.