Powers

The defendants Teel and Alvordian were the successful bidders for the making of ■ certain public improvements contemplated by the county of Los Angeles. They entered into a contract with the plaintiff whereby the latter was to do the grading and construct the sub-base upon a street known as Madison Avenue. After performing a part of" the work the plaintiff ceased operations and brought this action, claiming that he was prevented from completing his contract by the action of the defendants. The trial court sustained his contention and rendered judgment in his favor. The defendant Alvordian only prosecutes this appeal therefrom.

The appellant insists that the testimony is' insufficient to support the finding that the defendants breached the contract and contends that it demonstrates beyond doubt that the respondent abandoned the work because he did not have the resources with which to prosecute the job to completion. A short résumé of the testimony discloses ample foundation for the lower court’s conclusions. The respondent testified that after he had done all the rough grading it was possible to do he made a demand for some money and that the engineers of appellant came and looked…