Latson

Latson v. Nelson

Good Law
2 Cal. Unrep. 199
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJuly 24, 1883No. 8414California934 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Myrick, J.

The plaintiffs claim a lien on certain premises for the value of materials furnished for, and used in, the construction of a building erected on the premises. The complaint avers that the defendant Nelson, as contractor, was erecting the building for the defendant Thayer, and as such contractor purchased the materials and agreed to pay the plaintiffs therefor. The defendant Thayer is not connected with the purchase of the materials, other than is claimed to result from the contract for the building and as owner of the premises.' It is not alleged that any amount is due or is to come due or payable from defendant Thayer to defendant Nelson, on the contract, or in any other way. The plaintiffs assert that under article 20, section 15, of the constitution of 1879, and section 1183, Code of Civil Procedure, as amended in 1880, they have a lien, independent of any contract or obligation existing between the original parties.

The act of March 30, 1868, provided that persons performing labor upon, or furnishing materials for, any building, etc., *201 should have a lien upon the same for the work or labor done or materials furnished, whether done or furnished at the instance of the owner…

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.