Thomason

In July, 1891, the defendant De Greayer entered into a contract with the defendant corporation to pave with basalt stone blocks about five miles of the corporation’s track in the city and county of San Francisco. On the 4th of August, 1891, De Greayer commenced doing the work which he had contracted to perform, and continued the same up to September 2d, when the plaintiff commenced this action, asking to have the “contract reformed by inserting his name as one of the contracting parties therein.’’ The defendants demurred separately to the complaint upon the ground that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and the demurrers were sustained and the action dismissed. The plaintiff appeals from the judgment entered against him. *652 The demurrers were properly sustained. The facts stated in the complaint were insufficient in several respects.

1. The averments that “said De Greayer, by fraud, deceit, and misrepresentations, omitted to have the plaintiff’s name inserted in the contract with said corporation defendant for said work,” and “that such omission was done through the fraud, deceit, and trickery practiced by said De Greayer on said corporation…