Madary

Madary v. Smartt

Good Law
1 Cal. App. 498·1905 Cal. App. LEXIS 4·82 P. 561
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 30, 1905No. 57.California748 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Allen, J.

Action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien. Judgment and decree for plaintiff. From the judgment and an order denying a new trial the defendant Kern Valley Bank appeals.

The first question presented upon the appeal is as to the sufficiency of the complaint. The complaint sets out an agreement between the lessee of the owner and the contractor, by which the latter agrees to furnish all the material and labor and to make certain alterations and repairs to a building. It further alleges that he fully completed all of the work agreed to be done. Following this, it is alleged that plaintiff entered into an agreement with said contractor, whereby he agreed to and contracted to furnish him certain specified materials, which were to be used in making such alterations and repairs, and which alterations and repairs were made with the knowledge of the owners. A copy of the lien filed of record is incorporated in the complaint, and, after the usual and ordinary statements, concludes as follows: “Wherefore said M. R. Madary claims the benefit of the law relative to liens of mechanics and others upon real property as found in the Code of Civil Procedure of the state of California.” '

It must be…

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.