Clancy

Clancy v. Plover

Good Law
107 Cal. 272·1895 Cal. LEXIS 745·40 P. 394
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMay 23, 1895No. 15832California1,001 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Britt, J.

Under a contract with appellant the respondent did, and caused to be done, the work of painting a building and other structures situated on a parcel of land, the property of appellant, in the city and county of San Francisco. The work was completed March 9, 1891. For this appellant owed respondent $703, of which sum $345 was paid; and respondent brought this action to enforce a lien asserted by him against the premises where the work was done for the unpaid balance of $358. His complaint contains an allegation that an amount specified is a reasonable allowance for attorney’s fees in the action, which averment defendant denied; the court made no finding on this issue.

Respondent sublet a portion of the work to one Sta *274 pleton, agreeing to pay Mm therefor the sum of $100 After the entire job was completed respondent gave to Stapleton a written, order on appellant requesting the latter to pay Stapleton such sum of $100 out of the contract price then due respondent, but appellant refused to pay such order on presentation thereof. Stapleton filed in the recorder’s office a claim ef lien against the property for the amount due him from respondent; and, after appellant’s refusal to…

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.