Quartaroli

Quartaroli v. City of Sonoma

Good Law
18 Cal. App. 400·1912 Cal. App. LEXIS 313·123 P. 533
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 29, 1912Civ. No. 889.California4,268 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Chipman, J.

Plaintiffs bring the action to recover the possession of certain personal property or the value thereof, in case delivery cannot be had, alleged to be $3,590.85. They claim ownership by virtue of a bill of sale from one John T. MacQuiddy, of date September 13,1906. MacQuiddy had entered into a written contract with defendant, the city of Sonoma, to construct a municipal building for that city, agreeing to furnish all materials and labor therefor at the agreed price of $15,475. This contract was duly authorized and legally entered into and was duly recorded. No question arises as to full compliance with the provisions of the statute relating to the making and recording of such contracts. At the same time MacQuiddy executed a bond with said city, “in the sum of $4,000”; on which plaintiffs, including defendant Heggie’s intestate, were sureties, which recited the making of said contract and was, conditional upon its faithful performance by MacQuiddy, and that he “shall make full payment to all persons supplying him labor or materials in the prosecution of the work provided for in said contract. ’ ’ This bond was also recorded at the same time and with the contract. MacQuiddy entered…

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.