Hancock

Hancock v. Clark

Good Law
1922 Cal. App. LEXIS 576·56 Cal. App. 277·204 P. 1098
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 26, 1922Civ. No. 3581.California639 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Works, J.

This is an action to recover for the construction of a house under a builder’s contract. Plaintiff had judgment against one of the defendants and that defendant appeals.

[1] One question presented by the ease is whether the complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. At the trial the defendants moved for a judgment on the pleadings on the ground that it did not, and the motion was denied. The alleged defect in the complaint lies in the failure of respondent to plead in full the contract upon which he relies for a recovery of the amount due him for building the house, the plans and specifications which were a part of the agreement not being pleaded either as exhibits or according to their legal effect. [2] While it is well settled that plans and specifications are part of the contract to which they relate, as an examination of them is necessary to ascertain the complete agreement between the parties, they are not part of the agreement in such a sense that they must be pleaded in a complaint upon the agreement (9 C. J. 867). The reason for this rule is stated in an early case to be that plans and specifications “consist sometimes of extensive and complicated…

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.