Hogan

In this action the demurrer of the above-named corporation, defendant, to plaintiffs’ amended complaint was sustained, and judgment of dismissal was thereupon entered in favor of said corporation. Plaintiffs appeal from said judgment, and the only question presented is as to the sufficiency of said amended complaint as against said corporation.

The complaint against respondent corporation is based upon the acceptance of an order, of which the following is a copy:— “$386.00 Oakland, Cal., Oct. 3, 1899.

“Globe Mutual Loan Assn.—

“Please pay to Humboldt Lumber Co., or order, three hundred eighty-six and 00-100 dollars, for material furnished on your building, W. S. Grant street and Bancroft, Berkeley, ■ and charge same to my account. Frederick Esty.”

This order was on October 5, 1899, accepted by said corporation, by the following words and figures, viz:—

The following additional facts are shown by the complaint, viz: Esty was a building contractor, engaged in building, under contract, a house for the owner of a lot of land in Berkeley. He had purchased- from plaintiffs certain materials of the value of $386, for use in the construction of said house, and the order was given to…