McClure

The defendant and cross-complainant, John Q. McClure, the holder of a mortgage, appeals from a decree of foreclosure given in several actions for the foreclosure of mechanics’ liens. The actions were consolidated and tried as one action. The sole question is one of priority as between appellant, the holder of the mortgage, the defendant Young, who is the beneficiary under a trust deed, and the mechanics’ lien claimants.

The ease comes to us on a bill of exceptions. The bill contains no specification of the “particulars” wherein the evidence is claimed to be insufficient. [1] By a long line of decisions it is settled that the question of the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the findings cannot be considered on an appeal based upon a bill of exceptions, where, as here, the bill contains no specification of “particulars,” as required by section 648 of the Code of Civil Procedure. (Millar v. Millar, 175 Cal. 797 , [Ann Cas. 1918E, 184, L. R. A. 1918B, 415, 167 Pac. 394 ]; Regoli v. Stevenson, 179 Cal. 257 , [ 176 Pac. 158 ].) We shall therefore accept as true the facts as found by the trial court.

The ease, as shown by the findings, is substantially as follows: The lot…