McLaughlin

McLaughlin v. Perkins

Good Law
102 Cal. 502·1894 Cal. LEXIS 675·36 P. 839
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMay 26, 1894No. 15206California673 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Belcher, J.

This is an action to foreclose a lien for materials used and work done by subcontractors in the construction of a building for the defendant, Perkins.

The court below gave judgment for the defendants upon the ground that the claim of lien was not filed in time, and the plaintiff appeals from the judgment on the judgment-roll.

The only question in the case is, was the claim of lien filed within the time required by statute?

The court found the facts to be, in substance, as follows: On August 13, 1889, one E. W. Hyde entered into a written contract with defendant Perkins, to erect for him a certain building according to plans and specifications prepared by R. H. White, architect, and to finish the same within ninety days from said date, for the sum of $4,900, payable in installments — the fifth installment of $687.50 to be paid when the building should be completed and accepted, and the sixth installment of $1,250 to be paid thirty-five days after its completion. This contract was duly recorded, and, under it, Hyde proceeded to erect the building. On September *504 16th he contracted with the assignors of the plaintiff to do the tinning and plumbing of the building, which they…

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.