Kruse

Kruse v. Wilson

Good Law
1906 Cal. App. LEXIS 207·3 Cal. App. 91·84 P. 442
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 13, 1906Civ. No. 150.California902 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Harrison, J.

Appeal from judgments rendered sustaining demurrers to an amended and supplemental complaint.

The complaint is in two counts, in the first of which the plaintiff alleges that the defendants Newsom and McNeil were contractors for the construction of a public school building in San Francisco, with whom the defendant Wilson had contracted to perform the labor and furnish the materials for the plastering in said building; and that the plaintiff had sold and delivered to Wilson laths and lumber therefor of the value of $343.74, which had been used for said plastering, and that no part thereof had been paid. In the second count, the complaint alleges, in addition to the foregoing, that the building was completed and accepted September 17, 1903; that after its completion, and prior to September 23, 1903, Newsom and McNeil were paid the full contract price therefor; that the present action was commenced September 23, 1903; that at the time of its commencement the plaintiff caused a writ of attachment to be issued therein, and that on the same day, by virtue thereof, the defendant John Lachman, as sheriff of San Francisco, garnished all moneys due or owing the defendant Wilson by said…

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.