Willis

Hammond Lumber Co. v. Willis

Caution
171 Cal. 565·1915 Cal. LEXIS 663·153 P. 947
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 16, 1915L. A. No. 3660.California1,367 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Shaw, J.

This case presents cross-appeals, one by the plaintiffs, the other by the defendant Maryland Casualty Company. The case is a companion case to that of Roystone Company v. Darling, L. A. No. 4072, decided on December 15, 1915, ante, p. 526, [ 154 Pac. 15 ]. The respective appeals are from different parts of the judgment.

The plaintiffs began actions to foreclose mechanics’ liens asserted by them, respectively, against the property of the defendant Mertz, for labor and materials furnished by them to the defendant Willis, the contractor, which were used in the erection of buildings on the premises of Mertz in San Bernardino County. One building, a dwelling, was erected under a contract between Mertz and Willis dated October 10, 1911, which was accompanied by a bond executed by Willis and the Maryland Casualty Company to Mertz in the penal sum of $1,975, being one-half the contract price, conditioned substantially as required by section 1183 of the Code of Civil Procedure, as amended in 1911. Neither the contract nor the bond were ever filed in the office of the county recorder of the county. The other building was á garage erected on the same lot. No written contract was made…

Concurring Opinion

Henshaw, J.

I concur for the reasons given in the concurring opinion in Roystone Company v. Darling, L. A. No. 4072, decided December 15, 1915, ante, p. 526, [ 154 Pac. 15 ].

Melvin, J., concurred.

Rehearing denied.

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.