Heinsbergen

Heinsbergen v. Jenking

Good Law
113 Cal. App. 394·1931 Cal. App. LEXIS 907·298 P. 104
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 13, 1931Docket No. 6629.California1,955 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Archbald, J.

This is an action for the foreclosure of two mechanics’ liens for labor and material furnished by plaintiff and his assignor, A. H. Joffee, in the construction of a duplex residence on the property known as 6208 West Sixth Street, Los Angeles. In addition to the respondent Dale, A. C. Jenking and wife, who were alleged to be the “owners or reputed owners” of the property, were made defendants, and as to such alleged owners the complaint contains the allegations usual in such an action. The judgment recites that the action was dismissed as to the defendants Jenking on motion of plaintiff; that defendant Dale moved that no evidence be received as to him and that evidence be excluded as to him upon the ground that the complaint stated no cause of action against him, which motion was granted; that defendant Dale then moved for judgment “upon the pleadings and upon all of the record and proceedings in said action”, which motion was likewise granted by the court, judgment following in favor of the moving party. Plaintiff appeals.

A motion by the defendant for judgment on the pleadings tests the sufficiency of the complaint. “All the facts alleged in the complaint are admitted for the…

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.