Krenwinkel

Krenwinkel v. Henne.

Good Law
1919 Cal. App. LEXIS 643·42 Cal. App. 580·183 P. 957
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 8, 1919Civ. No. 2931.California1,636 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Thomas, J.

These two actions, brought for the foreclosure of mechanics’ liens against defendants and appellants, were consolidated in the superior court and tried as one. The liens claimed were for labor done and materials furnished in making certain alterations and improvements in a storeroom in the Henne Building, occupied by Naumann & Sehill, Inc., as tenants of the defendants and appellants, who were the owners.

Each lien claimant was an original contractor, and all the work done and materials furnished was at the instance of said tenants, and without the actual knowledge of appellants. The evidence was conflicting as to the knowledge of the employees of R. A. Rowan & Co., as shown and admitted to be the agent of appellant for the collection of rents and care of the building. Each of these respondents, except Suck, filed two claims, the first one in each ease being filed within sixty days after completion of their contract, and the second within ninety days after completion, but more than sixty days thereafter. No notice of the completion of any of the work was filed in the recorder’s office. Respondent Suck alleged that he was employed by appellants Jane Louise Henne and Jane Louise…

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.