Schirmer

This is an action on a street assessment. Plaintiff had judgment in the Court below; defendant moved for a new trial, which was refused; and the appeal is from both the judgment *281 and the order denying the motion for a new trial. There is but one question in the case, and that relates to the sufficiency of the demand.

It appears, from the diagram accompanying the assessment, that the lots numbered 5 and 18 were assessed, the former for $137.85, and the latter for $9.55. The return shows that a demand for an aggregate sum was made on the two lots. It is as follows:

The demand in this case was made upon lots 5 and 18 for one sum of money, the same being the aggregate amount of the assessments on the two lots, and was therefore insufficient. The demand should have been made on each lot for the amount assessed thereon. (Dyer v. Chase, 52 Cal. 440 .)

Judgment and order reversed.

Sharpstein, J., and Thornton, J., concurred.