Tucker

Los Angeles City School District v. Tucker

Good Law
1929 Cal. App. LEXIS 514·99 Cal. App. 390·278 P. 507
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 11, 1929Docket No. 3756.California3,571 words

Opinion

Opinion on Rehearing

The petition for a rehearing is denied. .

Appellant contends in the petition • for a rehearing that the Noyes Marble & Tile Company, is not entitled to judgment because its stop notice was not filed in time. This point was not urged in the original briefs. There is, however, no merit in this contention. The Noyes Marble & Tile Company had thirty days after filing of notice of completion of contract within which to file its stop notice. (Bird v. American Surety Co., 175 Cal. 625 [ 166 Pac. 1009 ]; Hughes Mfg. Co. v. Hathaway, 174 Cal. 44 [ 161 Pac. 1159 ]; Simons Brick Co. v. Hetzel et al., 72 Cal. App. 1 [ 236 Pac. 657 ].)

The notice of completion was not filed until May 9, 1925, and said stop notice was filed June 8, 1925; therefore, the stop notice was in time and the surety is liable to Noyes Marble & Tile Company.

Lead Opinion

Preston, J.

This is an appeal by defendant Southern Surety Company from a judgment rendered in favor of defendant Patten & Davies Lumber Company for the sum of $574.50, and from a judgment rendered in favor of defendant Noyes Marble & Tile Company for the sum of $264.

The facts are not in dispute and are briefly these: Lewis Tucker, a contractor, entered into a contract with the plaintiff Los Angeles City School District on the twenty-seventh day of February, 1925, for the alteration and repair of a school building in the city of Los Angeles for the contract price of $2,298. On the same day said Lewis Tucker as principal and appellant Southern Surety Company as surety executed a bond in the sum of $1,149, being fifty per cent of the contract price, in compliance with the requirements of the act of 1919 (Stats. 1919, p. 487), entitled “An Act to secure the payment of the claims of persons employed by contractors upon public works, and the claims of persons who *392 furnish materials, supplies . . . used or consumed by such contractors in the performance of such works, and prescribing the duties of certain public officers with respect thereto. ’ ’ This bond, by its terms, inured to the benefit…

Lead Opinion

This is an appeal by defendant Southern Surety Company from a judgment rendered in favor of defendant Patten Davies Lumber Company for the sum of $574.50, and from a judgment rendered in favor of defendant Noyes Marble Tile Company for the sum of $264. The facts are not in dispute and are briefly these: Lewis Tucker, a contractor, entered into a contract with the plaintiff Los Angeles City School District on the twenty-seventh day of February, 1925, for the alteration and repair of a school building in the city of Los Angeles for the contract price of $2,298. On the same day said Lewis Tucker as principal and appellant Southern Surety Company as surety executed a bond in the sum of $1,149, being fifty per cent of the contract price, in compliance with the requirements of the act of 1919 (Stats. 1919, p. 487), entitled "An Act to secure the payment of the claims of persons employed by contractors upon public works, and the claims of persons who *Page 392 furnish materials, supplies . . . used or consumed by such contractors in the performance of such works, and prescribing the duties of certain public officers with respect thereto." This bond, by its terms, inured to the benefit of…

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.