Flora

Flora v. Hankins

Good Law
1928 Cal. LEXIS 684·204 Cal. 351·268 P. 331
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJune 12, 1928Docket No. L.A. 9446.California715 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Richards, J.

This action is one for the foreclosure of a mechanic’s lien upon certain real property in the county of Los Angeles, the plaintiffs and lien claimants therein being copartners doing business under the firm name of Flora & Mahedy. In the month of December, 1923, the defendant and appellant, Sarah Holzberg, being the owner of said real estate, rented the same to her co-defendant Robert Hankins upon a month to month tenancy. In February, 1924, Hankins, having entered into possession of the premises under such tenancy, made a contract with the plaintiffs for the erection thereon of a one-story brick building for use as a garage, and which, by the terms of said contract, was to be constructed and completed between said date and the 15th of March, 1924. The plaintiffs having performed said contract and the defendant Hankins having paid only a portion of the contract price, the plaintiffs filed a contractor’s lien for the balance thereof, and within the time required by law commenced this action for the foreclosure of said lien. The trial court gave its judgment in the plaintiffs’ favor for the recovery of the sum of $1,140.75, with interest and costs, against the defendant Hankins and…

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.