Mechanic’s Lien—Amended Complaint—Appeal—Commencement or Action.—On an appeal from a judgment foreclosing a mechanic’s lien, based upon an amended complaint, it will be presumed in favor of the judgment, in the absence of a showing to the contrary, that the action was commenced within the time limited therefor.

Id.—Variance—Lien Filed by Copartnership.—There is no variance between a lien claim filed by and on behalf of a copartnership in its firm name and a complaint to foreclose the lien, in which the plaintiffs sued in their individual capacity and as copartners doing business under such firm name.

Id.—Members of Copartnership Need not be Stated in Lien.—There is no requirement in the law that in filing a copartnership lien claim the members of the copartnership shall be specifically named.

Id.—Partners cannot Sue by Fictitious Name.—While a copartnership acting under a. fictitious name may be sued in that name, the rule governing its prosecution of an action is that the full name of all the partners must be stated.

Id.—Pleading — Partnership Doing Business Under Fictitious Name—Filing Certificate.—Where a complaint by the persons composing a copartnership shows on its face that they were doing business under a fictitious name, the omission to aver a compliance with sections 2466 and 2468 of the Civil Code is not a fatal defect. The omission merely subjects the complaint to the special defense of a plea in abatement, and is cured by evidence offered at the trial of the timely filing of an adequate certificate.

Id.—Dismissal of Action Against Defendants Primarily Liable — Property not Released.—The dismissal of an action to foreclose the lien of a subcontractor, as against defendants, who were primary debtors personally liable to the plaintiff, does not relieve the property on which the building was erected from the lien.

Id.—Lien of Subcontractor—Indebtedness Due Employee.—Under section 1193 of the Code of Civil Procedure, as the same existed at the time of the trial, a subcontractor, who employed a third person to do part of the work and is legally bound to pay him therefor, may include in his claim of lien the value of the services of the employee, and recover judgment therefor, if the employee has filed no lien claim.